1057 réponses à ce sujet

[cyrslash1974]

The logic was right in the past, now this logic should be challenged as peace between Geths and Quarians is a hope and a proove that peace between synthetics and organics could be avoided, each of them keeping their own identity.

[Mendelevosa]

Killer3000ad wrote...

The mere fact that people have to jump through all sorts of mental gymnastics to make sense of the ending and still not answer everything, is proof of how poorly written it was.

Not to mention that its sad that random people on the internet can construct a better ending in minutes than Bioware could make in weeks or months.

[lillitheris]

cyrslash1974 wrote...

The logic was right in the past, now this logic should be challenged as peace between Geths and Quarians is a hope and a proove that peace between synthetics and organics could be avoided, each of them keeping their own identity.

Logic can’t be challenged. It’s either valid, or not. (In this case it’s not even valid if one of the premises is ‘find the best way to solve this’ rather than ‘pick first solution that comes to mind’ but that’s beside the point.)

The premises can be challenged, although a recent peace between single instances of organic and synthetic species does not really, in my mind, count as incontrovertible proof that the premise is wrong.

[covertdrizzt]

I guess I'm the only one who thinks the starchild's logic is flawed. He says that once civilazation gets to a certain level of technology the reapers come and destroy them. This is because they will create synthetics who will wipe out all organics. The problem with this is that they leave the mass relays and the citidel wich is what all organics tech is based on. So by leaving those they increase technolgical evolution greatly. also no single race of synthetics could desroy all organics with out the mass relays because, it would take forever to travel from one civilazation to another. I definitly think they create the problem and the solution. I also think starchild is a reaper.(he says we) So it doesn't matter to me if his logic is sound or not(which I believe its not) because he is a killer plain and simple. Every murderer can justify his actions to himself.

[cyrslash1974]

Lilitheris : It's a point of view, I respect it. However, I think that the logic of someone is also the result of a sum of analysis of different information. For example, the logic of an economist can be challenged (or unvalided) if he doesnt include in his mind the current economic situation (crisis, recession...).

The peace between organics and synthetics is not an incontrovertible proof, I agree, but a hope and an information to seriously consider.

But my english is bad, sorry if I have a lot of difficulty to explain clearly what I have in mind...

Modifié par cyrslash1974, 13 mai 2012 - 12:43 .

[lillitheris]

cyrslash1974 wrote...

Lilitheris : It's a point of view, I respect it. However, I think that the logic of someone is also the result of a sum of analysis of different information. For example, the logic of an economist can be challenged (or unvalided) if he doesnt include in his mind the current economic situation (crisis, recession...).

You’re describing premises, or assumptions made to establish the scenario to which logic is applied to reach a conclusion

Premises + logic = conclusion.

The peace between organics and synthetics is not an incontrovertible proof, I agree, but a hope and an information to seriously consider.

Sure.

[Averdi]

The (OP) theory seems, to me, to make far too expansive a use of assumptions in an effort to maintain (generally) consistent logic. A lot of this is brought up in the various comments. The effect is that it renders the entire analysis relatively meaningless because it's assumed away complicating difficulties.

[feliciano2040]

covertdrizzt wrote...

I guess I'm the only one who thinks the starchild's logic is flawed. He says that once civilazation gets to a certain level of technology the reapers come and destroy them. This is because they will create synthetics who will wipe out all organics. The problem with this is that they leave the mass relays and the citidel wich is what all organics tech is based on. So by leaving those they increase technolgical evolution greatly. also no single race of synthetics could desroy all organics with out the mass relays because, it would take forever to travel from one civilazation to another. I definitly think they create the problem and the solution. I also think starchild is a reaper.(he says we) So it doesn't matter to me if his logic is sound or not(which I believe its not) because he is a killer plain and simple. Every murderer can justify his actions to himself.

A valid concern, however, even without the relays, organics are the only ones at a disadvantage, synthetics can travel for as long as they have to, without any concern, since they don't age, thus, the cycle of extinction would still exist, it would just be slower.

[covertdrizzt]

feliciano2040 wrote...

covertdrizzt wrote...

I guess I'm the only one who thinks the starchild's logic is flawed. He says that once civilazation gets to a certain level of technology the reapers come and destroy them. This is because they will create synthetics who will wipe out all organics. The problem with this is that they leave the mass relays and the citidel wich is what all organics tech is based on. So by leaving those they increase technolgical evolution greatly. also no single race of synthetics could desroy all organics with out the mass relays because, it would take forever to travel from one civilazation to another. I definitly think they create the problem and the solution. I also think starchild is a reaper.(he says we) So it doesn't matter to me if his logic is sound or not(which I believe its not) because he is a killer plain and simple. Every murderer can justify his actions to himself.

A valid concern, however, even without the relays, organics are the only ones at a disadvantage, synthetics can travel for as long as they have to, without any concern, since they don't age, thus, the cycle of extinction would still exist, it would just be slower.

Yeah possible, maybe they never devolope synthetics without the tech.  who knows how fast ftl is? they could destroy organics and by the time they got back to that system there could new organics. I believe it would take billions of years to travel to all the systems with ftl.  but who knows not enough info. I was just trying to point out that the starchild isn't all knowing.

[Dr. Megaverse]

I was wondering how long it'd be untill a serious post about the Technological Singularity would be made.  It's a neat idea, with one problem. 

The writers did not put enough effort into writing the story in that direction. 

For me that is where the technological singularity argument ends. 

[covertdrizzt]

Dr. Megaverse wrote...

I was wondering how long it'd be untill a serious post about the Technological Singularity would be made.  It's a neat idea, with one problem. 

The writers did not put enough effort into writing the story in that direction. 

For me that is where the technological singularity argument ends. 

up until the last five minutes of this game, I thought the reapers did what they did because thats how they reproduced. I was fine with that.  They should have stuck with it.

[feliciano2040]

covertdrizzt wrote...

Yeah possible, maybe they never devolope synthetics without the tech.  who knows how fast ftl is? they could destroy organics and by the time they got back to that system there could new organics. I believe it would take billions of years to travel to all the systems with ftl.  but who knows not enough info. I was just trying to point out that the starchild isn't all knowing.

It's not that The Catalyst is "all-knowing", that is never said in the game, he is just an incalculably old artificial intelligence that believes it's doing the right thing.

[covertdrizzt]

feliciano2040 wrote...

covertdrizzt wrote...

Yeah possible, maybe they never devolope synthetics without the tech.  who knows how fast ftl is? they could destroy organics and by the time they got back to that system there could new organics. I believe it would take billions of years to travel to all the systems with ftl.  but who knows not enough info. I was just trying to point out that the starchild isn't all knowing.

It's not that The Catalyst is "all-knowing", that is never said in the game, he is just an incalculably old artificial intelligence that believes it's doing the right thing.

I just don't buy it. an A.I. wouldn't leave anthing to chance it would have destroyed relays to increase the time between singulairities.  This is just my take on it.

[Peranor]

generalleo03 wrote... 


....The key points of the technological singularity are that, once created, AI will outpace humans (organics) in intelligence, strength, civilization, and wipe us all out. AI lacks empathy. Scientists have long postulated that the reason human's have morality at all is empathy. We can imagine ourselves in someone else's shoes and thus invision what it would be like. Therefore we can figure out what we don't want to happen. In fact, empathy is so important that a lack of it is considered a mental disorder (it makes one a Psycopath). Since AI doesn't care about us by some intrinsic order of its being, it will view us as just more parts of the universe, like rocks. It could wipe us out as a means to prevent natural disasters, or harvest us as resources. It could even take its main task, such as building widgets, too far and wipe us out in an attempt to optimize its goal. Those are key points that need to be explored for the technological singularity to make sense.

So let me state up front, it is not a lack of knowledge of the technological singularity that has people pissed. Do you really want to argue that the set of people playing Mass Effect and the set of people who have seen "The Matrix" are really disjoint? Come on here. There is a ton of popular references to the technological singularity in all forms of narrative. Movies like "The Matrix", "I, Robot", "The Terminator", stories like "The Evitable Conflict", "The Last Question" by Asimov, "I Have No Mouth, and I Must Scream". And those are what I can come up with off the top of my head. People playing Mass Effect are plenty familiar with the concept of the Technological Singularity, even if they cannot tell you the name of the concept. The problem is that they were not told to care about the concept in the entire story arc of Mass Effect (even including the end). Let's start with this, there are 3 Artificial Intelligences explored in the main story Mass Effect. The Geth, EDI, and the Reapers.


The Geth start out as villains that could easily have explored the Technological Singularity. In Mass Effect 1, they are villains working for Sovereign to kill organics. Their motives are mostly unknown, and could have easily degenerated into an exploration of the Technological Singularity. However, that exploration all falls apart with one word: Legion. The Geth are not a uniform species of AI's bent on harvesting us (though the reapers are!). They are a civilization. They have internal conflicts, Geth vs. Heretic Geth. They have goals like becoming strong with their own two hands, not by taking the Reapers tech. They compromise said goals. The Geth are an exploration of the awakening of consciousness. Consciousness is considered one of the great unlikely events in Human evolution, and the Geth are a direct exploration of how that could happen. The problem is, nowhere in any of the full Geth story line do any of the main points of the Technological Singularity get explored. Where is the indifference to organics? Sure, they are isolationist, but they aren't indifferent. Even without the morning war exploration in Mass Effect 3, the Geth are not a representation of the Technological Singularity, they are directly referenced as a species that happens to be synthetic, not a representation of a species defined by the fact it is synthetic. By the end of Mass Effect 3, they Geth are fully actuallized real people who make decisions based on information, survival, and empathy. Even more so if they survive, they become full individuals. The presentation of the Geth is one of a civilization comming in its own within the galactic community, not one of an Artificial Intelligence becoming dispassionate and logical. And that doesn't even include the Morning War, which was not started by the AI attempting to wipe out its masters, but by the Quarian fear of what they Geth were and could do. The Geth are NOT an exploration of any concepts of the technological singularity.

EDI is another AI that basically comes to its own within the Mass Effect community. Granted I thought it was kind of a stretch to make EDI the AI you "defeated" at luna in Mass Effect 1, that also happened to give you an upgrade (Booh Yah!). But let's take that as a part of the story, since it was on a main quest. She starts out, like the Geth, as something that could have explored the Technological Singularity. In Mass Effect 1, she fights organics. However, in Mass Effect 2, she is a full fledged crew member. She has a sense of humor, and interacts and grows. Hell she's responsible for some of the funniest lines! "I like the sight of humans on their knees", "This is all Joker's fault. What a tool he was. I have to spend all day computing pi because he plugged in the Overlord.". Comon, you laughed. We all did. However, she wasn't fully unleashed until the end of Mass Effect 2, so she could still explore the technological singularity. But she didn't. Once unleashed she didn't because impassionate, logical, and indifferent. She became MORE human. MORE a part of the crew. A dispassionate AI wouldn't go to the collector base, wouldn't help them defeat them. Too much risk. In Mass Effect 3 EDI becomes basically human, and I don't mean she gets a body. I mean she makes decisions we all do. What's important to me, survival or my friends? Selfishness or Selflessness? Reguardless of her choices, the fact she is making them means she's becoming human. She can even start a relationship for goodness sake! She is another exploration of an AI becoming more and more human.

Notice a pattern here? The Geth and EDI both provide direct evidence that the real difference between synthetics and organics is actually pretty small. They are an exploration of awakening consciousness. Most importantly, they are NOT SCARY. They don't explore the technological singularity in any way. They don't state how AI outpaces organics, they don't show anything remotely like that. In fact, this exploration is completely contrary to the technological singularity. The Techonological Singularity requires that AI cannot coexist with organics. To explore AI that can for 99 hours, then say, whoops can't work is a conflicting theme that makes a bad ending.

The last AI explored are the Reapers themselves. Only they aren't. The motives of the Reapers are not explored until the last 10 minutes. And these people argue that the 14 lines of dialogue at the end completely put the Reapers as preventing the technological singularity? wait, scratch that, a lot of those lines are explaining what the "crucible could do", so its not even 14 lines. If you are telling me you can completely explain the motives of the Reapers in 7 lines or fewer of dialogue, then let me tell you that you are a moron. Also, it takes BALLS to argue that the Reapers are preventing the technological singularity, when they are literally the only AI in the story that could even be argued to explore the concept of the technological singularity at all! They could be argued to represent the eventuallity of that very concept!

Now, I do feel it necessary to address a point here. There are definately side quests that explore the Technological Singularity. The rogue citadel AI in Mass Effect 1, the loki mech saga in Mass Effect 2. However, these side quests don't affect the main plot, and can be completely skipped without any hinderance to the story. If the technological singularity was really an important concept to understand the Reapers, then it should NOT be skippable, and should be forced. If the writer's don't force you to care about it, IE it doesn't affect the main plot, then it is de facto evidence it isn't really important.

The problem here isn't that the technological singularity couldn't explain some of this, the problem is that the story doesn't explore that concept. You are literally telling the writer's of Mass Effect that it is okay to NOT tell you the story, that you will fill in the blanks that are missing to force it to make sence, and they call them geniuses for it. You are a sucker, and I don't care if you take offense to that or not. The narrative of the main plot of Mass Effect and missions that effect the main plot don't care about the Technological Singularity, and if you have to add external information into the narrative to force the motive of the main antagonist to make sense, that is a definition of narrative failure.

Let me also say this, it doesn't matter if the catalyst is a billion years old, and spent two hours recanting all the time's AI attacked organics. The point is NARRATIVE! The story doesn't explore those concepts. It doesn't matter if he *could* know everything, what matters is the story being told. The technological singularity does not belong as a part of the ending to Mass Effect. This is why the Extended Cut will suck. There needs to be complete thematic rewrite to the end to force it to make sense. Either that, or a complete rewrite of the other 99 hours of Mass Effect.

Modifié par anorling, 13 mai 2012 - 04:15 .

[Candidate 88766]

That was a great post OP.

I think the gist of the Catalyst's logic is that, despite the fact that organics and synthetics can be at peace with each other, conflict in the first place is inevitable. And the more technologically advanced an organic civilization gets, the more advanced the synthetics they create will be. Eventually you reach a point where the synthetic race is capable of winning.

The geth, while able to drive the quarians off of Rannoch, wouldn't have been able to stand up to the combined might of the galaxy. And even after 300 years to develop on their own, the quarians are able to beat them  - without the Reaper code, the code that Admiral Xen developed would've ensured a quarian victory. Likewise, in the Prothean Cycle the Zha'Til were being slowly beaten by the Protheans.

Until civilization reaches a technological singularity, the conflict between organics and synthetics will ultimately result in organics winning. Once the singularity has been reached, and synthetics have surpassed organics in every way, synthetics will win. And while a victorious organic race can simply make new synthetics, if synthetics are victorious then it could be thousands of years before new organic civilizations emerge. Chances are that the synthetics would remove all potential future threats to themselves, preventing intelligent organic life from evolving for millennia.

The conflict on Rannoch is proof of this. In the end, neither side was able to beat the other (it is likely the quarians would've won if the geth hadn't been upgraded by the Reapers though), and as a result peace was possible. However, there was conflict before this peace could occur. After organic life has reached a technological singularity, this inevitable conflict would lead to the utter destruction of the organics. Whether peace would've been possible is academic - there will always be conflict between organics and synthetics, and after this point the synthetics will win before there is a chance for peace. Organics may surrender, but organics hold no benefit for synthetics how have surpassed them in every way. They are simply a risk, and if the synthetics already have the upper-hand there is no reason for them to accept a surrender.


That is what the Catalyst is trying to avoid - not conflict between organics and synthetics in general, but a conflict between organics and synthetics where the synthetics win.


The Cycle ensures this point is never reached. If synthetics become too powerful, the Reaper vanguard can signal the keepers and begin the Cycle.

If must also be noted that the Catalyst doesn't believe it is wiping out organic life - it is 'archiving' them in Reaper form. It is actually quite clever - you prevent the organic race from reaching a technological singularity, provide more Reapers with which to continue the Cycle, and ensure that most organic species don't go extinct. Whether existing in a Reaper shell is desirable is unlikely, but technically ascensions ensures that the species is immortalised, giving other species the chance for a brief existance. Its horrific, but also very efficient.

And in answer to one of the points in the OP:

21. It seems weird that the Reapers haven't rebelled or that they're all in complete agreement - this seems to sacrifice their individuality of each being a "nation".

True. We don't know really to what degree each Reaper has free will, or each mind that makes up a Reaper identity has a say in things, or to what degree the Catalyst controls all of them. Sovvy/Harby's dialogue seem at odds with the Catalyst's claims of control, so maybe there is a middle ground in which the Catalyst gives directives but the Reapers have limited freedom in how to accomplish them. I don't know.

Given that everyone 'uploaded' into the Reaper shell is a Reaper captive, it is likely that everyone 'uploaded' was also indoctrinated prior to being turned into a Reaper. If this is true, it explains why the Reapers are so brutal in how they carry out the Cycle - the Reapers used to be organic races, so unless they are indoctrinated or something I struggle to see why they are so brutal when the Cycle begins. A being that values organic life wouldn't be able to turn them into husks. So it seems likely to me that most minds in a Reapers' 'network' of organic minds must be indocrinated. 

Modifié par Candidate 88766, 21 mai 2012 - 10:56 .

[JShepppp]

Ieldra2 wrote...

@JShepppp:
Two corrections for your OP (still reading the whole again, more may come):

(1) In your section "Points from the thread", point 12, you say "EDI's statement at the end of ME2 about Reapers being organic/sentient hybrids, I believe, is canon." I believe this is incorrect. EDI was speculating, and I think what Legion says after ME2's suicide mission is more correct. According to Legion, the Reapers are "Transcended flesh. Billions of organic minds, uploaded and conjoined within immortal machine bodies. "Each a nation"." (More about that in this thread). This would mean that the Reapers are physically 100% synthetic and the Crucible, as it destroys all synthetics, will of course also destroy the Reapers.
 
Also, the target is synthetic life, not dumb machines. Thus I do not think that all synthetic implants will be destroyed as well and that Shepard dies in Destroy because of that. That would mean that all kinds of technology will be destroyed as well, which only happens in the low EMS-variant. Shepard dies because things around them explode. We see Shepard engulfed by an explosion in Destroy.

Udated, thanks lol.

(2) The thread link you posted in section IV no.6, titled "Mass relay travel and discussion of post-relay instantaneous travel technology" links to the pro-ending compendium you also linked as no.5. Can it be that this was supposed to link to my thread "Out of the dark age: relays, FTL and rebuilding galactic civilization". Not that I'm the only one who has posted about this, but the topic description fits.

Added your thread too. 

[JShepppp]

BackwardsMan4TW wrote...

Nice post OP. Well thought out and well presented. It sounds like your
opinions mostly match up with my own. The concept itself wasn't so bad,
it just didn't fit as the ending of the ME universe and it was poorly
executed.

Also, about point III, 4 (the one that asks why the reapers don't just harvest pre-spaceflight civilizations):

Maybe the reapers are actually waiting for organics to develop AIs that threaten to surpass them. For instance, in the current cycle, we have the geth. In the prothean cycle, they had their own version of synthetics.

So maybe the reapers aren't waiting for organics to rise to space-flight status, but are actually waiting for AIs to become a tangible threat to organics. Until then, the reapers would allow organics to grow and flourish. After all, their purpose is to allow organics to grow, wiping them out only when they become too advanced. So why wipe them out when they've only just invented the wheel? Better to let them advance as far as is feasible.

Once they develop AIs that are growing more intelligent than organics though, it would make sense (from the catalyst's and reapers' standpoint) to intervene before the singularity is reached.

Great point. Added it (in a summarized form). Thanks!

[JShepppp]

Averdi wrote...

The (OP) theory seems, to me, to make far too expansive a use of assumptions in an effort to maintain (generally) consistent logic. A lot of this is brought up in the various comments. The effect is that it renders the entire analysis relatively meaningless because it's assumed away complicating difficulties.

Yeah, I acknowledge this freely. But without any assumptions, we're basically left with nothing, and I wasn't satisfied enough with that. The EC may throw everything in this thread into the trash, but it'd still be worth it for me because I'd have found some peace with the ending in the days leading up to it (even if it was wrong) just like the IT theorists. 

But yeah, there are a lot of theories going around. The nature of the ending just spawned them, I suppose. Take your pick

[JShepppp]

covertdrizzt wrote...

Dr. Megaverse wrote...

I was wondering how long it'd be untill a serious post about the Technological Singularity would be made.  It's a neat idea, with one problem. 

The writers did not put enough effort into writing the story in that direction. 

For me that is where the technological singularity argument ends. 

up until the last five minutes of this game, I thought the reapers did what they did because thats how they reproduced. I was fine with that.  They should have stuck with it.

Yeah, it seems like they had hints of it (cut codex entry, leaked script, etc) but just slapped it on randomly at the end. There's a definite disconnect, and I feel that just a few random dialogue lines, Codex entires, etc. would have made a huge difference at least. Not a lot of effort for that, but then again, I have no idea how game development works. 

[JShepppp]

Just want to say that the quote you gave was a very well-written argument and I greatly respect it.

anorling wrote...




generalleo03 wrote... 


....The key points of the technological singularity are that, once created, AI will outpace humans (organics) in intelligence, strength, civilization, and wipe us all out. AI lacks empathy. Scientists have long postulated that the reason human's have morality at all is empathy. We can imagine ourselves in someone else's shoes and thus invision what it would be like. Therefore we can figure out what we don't want to happen. In fact, empathy is so important that a lack of it is considered a mental disorder (it makes one a Psycopath). Since AI doesn't care about us by some intrinsic order of its being, it will view us as just more parts of the universe, like rocks. It could wipe us out as a means to prevent natural disasters, or harvest us as resources. It could even take its main task, such as building widgets, too far and wipe us out in an attempt to optimize its goal. Those are key points that need to be explored for the technological singularity to make sense.

Perhaps they aren't explained because they can't (by the nature of the singularity) and the Catalyst just worries about the negative situations.

So let me state up front, it is not a lack of knowledge of the technological singularity that has people pissed. Do you really want to argue that the set of people playing Mass Effect and the set of people who have seen "The Matrix" are really disjoint? Come on here. There is a ton of popular references to the technological singularity in all forms of narrative. Movies like "The Matrix", "I, Robot", "The Terminator", stories like "The Evitable Conflict", "The Last Question" by Asimov, "I Have No Mouth, and I Must Scream". And those are what I can come up with off the top of my head. People playing Mass Effect are plenty familiar with the concept of the Technological Singularity, even if they cannot tell you the name of the concept. The problem is that they were not told to care about the concept in the entire story arc of Mass Effect (even including the end). Let's start with this, there are 3 Artificial Intelligences explored in the main story Mass Effect. The Geth, EDI, and the Reapers.

But perhaps it could have been a more prominent theme. Several scifi themes have been recycled (nature of the genre) but the game seemed to push us into other directions. 

The Geth start out as villains that could easily have explored the Technological Singularity. In Mass Effect 1, they are villains working for Sovereign to kill organics. Their motives are mostly unknown, and could have easily degenerated into an exploration of the Technological Singularity. However, that exploration all falls apart with one word: Legion. The Geth are not a uniform species of AI's bent on harvesting us (though the reapers are!). They are a civilization. They have internal conflicts, Geth vs. Heretic Geth. They have goals like becoming strong with their own two hands, not by taking the Reapers tech. They compromise said goals. The Geth are an exploration of the awakening of consciousness. Consciousness is considered one of the great unlikely events in Human evolution, and the Geth are a direct exploration of how that could happen. The problem is, nowhere in any of the full Geth story line do any of the main points of the Technological Singularity get explored. Where is the indifference to organics? Sure, they are isolationist, but they aren't indifferent. Even without the morning war exploration in Mass Effect 3, the Geth are not a representation of the Technological Singularity, they are directly referenced as a species that happens to be synthetic, not a representation of a species defined by the fact it is synthetic. By the end of Mass Effect 3, they Geth are fully actuallized real people who make decisions based on information, survival, and empathy. Even more so if they survive, they become full individuals. The presentation of the Geth is one of a civilization comming in its own within the galactic community, not one of an Artificial Intelligence becoming dispassionate and logical. And that doesn't even include the Morning War, which was not started by the AI attempting to wipe out its masters, but by the Quarian fear of what they Geth were and could do. The Geth are NOT an exploration of any concepts of the technological singularity.

The Dyson sphere is the only indication, subtly, of a singularity. While this is a valid criticism, the nature of the rather theological aspects of the singularity may mean that they can't show what hapens but can only tell/guess, and yes, they still don't do that very well.

EDI is another AI that basically comes to its own within the Mass Effect community. Granted I thought it was kind of a stretch to make EDI the AI you "defeated" at luna in Mass Effect 1, that also happened to give you an upgrade (Booh Yah!). But let's take that as a part of the story, since it was on a main quest. She starts out, like the Geth, as something that could have explored the Technological Singularity. In Mass Effect 1, she fights organics. However, in Mass Effect 2, she is a full fledged crew member. She has a sense of humor, and interacts and grows. Hell she's responsible for some of the funniest lines! "I like the sight of humans on their knees", "This is all Joker's fault. What a tool he was. I have to spend all day computing pi because he plugged in the Overlord.". Comon, you laughed. We all did. However, she wasn't fully unleashed until the end of Mass Effect 2, so she could still explore the technological singularity. But she didn't. Once unleashed she didn't because impassionate, logical, and indifferent. She became MORE human. MORE a part of the crew. A dispassionate AI wouldn't go to the collector base, wouldn't help them defeat them. Too much risk. In Mass Effect 3 EDI becomes basically human, and I don't mean she gets a body. I mean she makes decisions we all do. What's important to me, survival or my friends? Selfishness or Selflessness? Reguardless of her choices, the fact she is making them means she's becoming human. She can even start a relationship for goodness sake! She is another exploration of an AI becoming more and more human.

Notice a pattern here? The Geth and EDI both provide direct evidence that the real difference between synthetics and organics is actually pretty small. They are an exploration of awakening consciousness. Most importantly, they are NOT SCARY. They don't explore the technological singularity in any way. They don't state how AI outpaces organics, they don't show anything remotely like that. In fact, this exploration is completely contrary to the technological singularity. The Techonological Singularity requires that AI cannot coexist with organics. To explore AI that can for 99 hours, then say, whoops can't work is a conflicting theme that makes a bad ending.

The last AI explored are the Reapers themselves. Only they aren't. The motives of the Reapers are not explored until the last 10 minutes. And these people argue that the 14 lines of dialogue at the end completely put the Reapers as preventing the technological singularity? wait, scratch that, a lot of those lines are explaining what the "crucible could do", so its not even 14 lines. If you are telling me you can completely explain the motives of the Reapers in 7 lines or fewer of dialogue, then let me tell you that you are a moron. Also, it takes BALLS to argue that the Reapers are preventing the technological singularity, when they are literally the only AI in the story that could even be argued to explore the concept of the technological singularity at all! They could be argued to represent the eventuallity of that very concept!

Very true points. Again, the only defense is the singularity is unpredictable. Perhaps Legion/EDI were to show that there can be several outcomes and that war is not the only option (doesn't mean war is inevitable though). They were just there to add color and flavor to the overall picture/dish, which remains relatively unchanged. 

Now, I do feel it necessary to address a point here. There are definately side quests that explore the Technological Singularity. The rogue citadel AI in Mass Effect 1, the loki mech saga in Mass Effect 2. However, these side quests don't affect the main plot, and can be completely skipped without any hinderance to the story. If the technological singularity was really an important concept to understand the Reapers, then it should NOT be skippable, and should be forced. If the writer's don't force you to care about it, IE it doesn't affect the main plot, then it is de facto evidence it isn't really important.

The problem here isn't that the technological singularity couldn't explain some of this, the problem is that the story doesn't explore that concept. You are literally telling the writer's of Mass Effect that it is okay to NOT tell you the story, that you will fill in the blanks that are missing to force it to make sence, and they call them geniuses for it. You are a sucker, and I don't care if you take offense to that or not. The narrative of the main plot of Mass Effect and missions that effect the main plot don't care about the Technological Singularity, and if you have to add external information into the narrative to force the motive of the main antagonist to make sense, that is a definition of narrative failure.

Agree with narrative failure part in general though I would like to disagree with the sucker part lol. We're just trying to make sense of things like IT people.

This is also my problem with dark energy being a possible ending - besides making the Reapers seem even less evil, it was also only mainly hinted at during one (could-be-optional) ME2 mission where you recruit Tali. 

Let me also say this, it doesn't matter if the catalyst is a billion years old, and spent two hours recanting all the time's AI attacked organics. The point is NARRATIVE! The story doesn't explore those concepts. It doesn't matter if he *could* know everything, what matters is the story being told. The technological singularity does not belong as a part of the ending to Mass Effect. This is why the Extended Cut will suck. There needs to be complete thematic rewrite to the end to force it to make sense. Either that, or a complete rewrite of the other 99 hours of Mass Effect.

Agreed that it should have been better. I do however think that a few dialogue or hints along the way would go a long way to making things make more sense rather than full thematic rewrite. 

[JShepppp]

Candidate 88766 wrote...

That was a great post OP.

I think the gist of the Catalyst's logic is that, despite the fact that organics and synthetics can be at peace with each other, conflict in the first place is inevitable. And the more technologically advanced an organic civilization gets, the more advanced the synthetics they create will be. Eventually you reach a point where the synthetic race is capable of winning.

That is what the Catalyst is trying to avoid - not conflict between organics and synthetics in general, but a conflict between organics and synthetics where the synthetics win.

The Cycle ensures this point is never reached. If synthetics become too powerful, the Reaper vanguard can signal the keepers and begin the Cycle.

If must also be noted that the Catalyst doesn't believe it is wiping out organic life - it is 'archiving' them in Reaper form. It is actually quite clever - you prevent the organic race from reaching a technological singularity, provide more Reapers with which to continue the Cycle, and ensure that most organic species don't go extinct. Whether existing in a Reaper shell is desirable is unlikely, but technically ascensions ensures that the species is immortalised, giving other species the chance for a brief existance. Its horrific, but also very efficient.

And in answer to one of the points in the OP:

21. It seems weird that the Reapers haven't rebelled or that they're all in complete agreement - this seems to sacrifice their individuality of each being a "nation".

True. We don't know really to what degree each Reaper has free will, or each mind that makes up a Reaper identity has a say in things, or to what degree the Catalyst controls all of them. Sovvy/Harby's dialogue seem at odds with the Catalyst's claims of control, so maybe there is a middle ground in which the Catalyst gives directives but the Reapers have limited freedom in how to accomplish them. I don't know.

Given that everyone 'uploaded' into the Reaper shell is a Reaper captive, it is likely that everyone 'uploaded' was also indoctrinated prior to being turned into a Reaper. If this is true, it explains why the Reapers are so brutal in how they carry out the Cycle - the Reapers used to be organic races, so unless they are indoctrinated or something I struggle to see why they are so brutal when the Cycle begins. A being that values organic life wouldn't be able to turn them into husks. So it seems likely to me that most minds in a Reapers' 'network' of organic minds must be indocrinated. 

Agree with everything. About being indoctrinated, it could be that the minds are free to think but the actions are controlled by the Catalyst, who is clearly shackled in some form (can't change its own directive), perhaps in order to stop the Reapers from becoming the very things they were created to destroy. 

[JShepppp]

Updated OP. Apologies for being off for about a week or so.

[Aulis Vaara]

It's been established in Mass Effect that technology has a definite end point and multiple paths for how to get there. Therefor, organics would not be "forever after" behind.

Besides, even if they were, would that even matter? If synthetics become more evolved than organics, does this even matter? One would think that with the better understanding of the universe that come with greater technical knowledge, that synthetics would adopt more of a "live and let live" policy.

Some synthetics might even share their advancements with organics if they know it won't make them a threat.

[JShepppp]

Aulis Vaara wrote...

It's been established in Mass Effect that technology has a definite end point and multiple paths for how to get there. Therefor, organics would not be "forever after" behind.

Besides, even if they were, would that even matter? If synthetics become more evolved than organics, does this even matter? One would think that with the better understanding of the universe that come with greater technical knowledge, that synthetics would adopt more of a "live and let live" policy.

Some synthetics might even share their advancements with organics if they know it won't make them a threat.

We don't know if any of this would be the case. On the off chance it isn't, we'd be screwed. The Catalyst doesn't want to take that chance.