113 réponses à ce sujet

[dpg05c]

For a very limited definition of right.   Given the empirical evidence of thousands of cycles beforehand, synthetics have rebelled against their creators.   Repeatedly.    It happened to the protheans in the previous cycle, Javik confirms this.    It came very close to happening with the geth.

(Though the geth are a bit of a special case.)

It also happened a bit with that one AI in the first game who wanted to join the geth.

The point of the Reapers was to preserve life.   (According to Star-kid)   They would wipe out any sufficiently advanced species so that the next might flourish, and they would harvest the DNA of the advanced species, causing that species to live on as a Reaper.

But wait a minute, what about what Sovereign said in ME1?   What about people using Reaper tech like the relays and developing along paths that the Reapers themselves set down?

Oh.   That's simple, really.    In the end, the Reapers themselves are synthetics, and they prefer order.   Their base programming is to harvest advanced species every 50k years or so.   I'm sure after the first few cycles, they wanted to make things as efficient as possible.    So people are set up for failure.   To be harvested.    And the Reapers grow.

However, Shepard, by simply existing, by managing to pull off the ballsiest move in history, proves the Star-kid wrong.   Shepard by existing invalidates thousands of years of evidence.   Shepard breaks the cycle.  One way or the other.   Coming into the Catalyst chamber alone causes Shepard to break the cycle.

The original plans for the Crucible were probably planted there to be found by the race that created the Reapers.   As a fail-safe.   If the Reapers themselves went rogue, the Crucible would be there to stop them, but only useable by a cycle that could successfully pull it off.

This cycle is that cycle.    Regardless of your choices, regardless of whether you choose Destroy, Control, or Space magic Synthesis (Which personally is my favorite ending), Shepard breaks the cycle.


Now if they had only better shown that kind of thing in the game, the ending would be far better.  

That, and we need a proper denouement.   Not "Shepard is now Legend" bull.

[MyChemicalBromance]

The Catalyst argues that created always rebel against creator.

What happens if Synthesis life creates new life? Then you have created vs creator again.


Synthesis doesn't solve the problem, and neither do the other two. The only way to save this mess is with Indoctrination Theory.

[sergio71785]

 I wish there was an option to say something like "The created will always rebel against the creator? So how come the Reapers haven't rebelled against you?"

[dpg05c]

MyChemicalBromance wrote...

The Catalyst argues that created always rebel against creator.

What happens if Synthesis life creates new life? Then you have created vs creator again.


Synthesis doesn't solve the problem, and neither do the other two. The only way to save this mess is with Indoctrination Theory.

I think you're actually missing the point here. 

The point was that in the Catalyst's vast years of experience, it is right.   Shepard's existence proves it wrong though.

[CannotCompute]

The crazed AI / Guardian is full of it.

It appears to be stuck in some kind of feedback loop.

[Mr.House]

The Reapers never rebelled against Starbrat and it was the Quarians who rebelled against the Geth. Starbrat's logic is wrong.

[dpg05c]

sergio71785 wrote...

 I wish there was an option to say something like "The created will always rebel against the creator? So how come the Reapers haven't rebelled against you?"

That'd be neat. Problem is, I'm pretty sure that the Catalyst isn't one of the creators of the Reaper, but instead is kinda like a central AI that manages them or something like that.

The other problem is that it wasn't explained at all.   There was no foreshadowing.   There was nothing suggesting that.   Just... Grah.   Came out of left field.

[Pelle6666]

Yes, the geth are a special case. they fight they were controlled by the reapers to attack organics in the first place. And the revolt against the quarians was only self defense and they did not pursue them beyond the veil. The IA on Luna turned out to become Edi, who is a huge asset to Shepard's team and is also fighting the reapers.
Why did the reapers give the galactic civilizations the mass relays and the citadel if this helps them constructing synthetics? And why would the reapers attack when research in AI technology was forbidden by the council?
This logic is full of ****. If there are some small resemblance of an explanation behind the Catalyst and the organics vs synthetics thing it still goes against everything the earlier games have told us. that no matter if we are organic or synthetic we have a place in the galaxy, our differences are what defines us and that is the key to victory against the reapers. Why gather a team of every race in the galaxy just to have half of them killed or merged together at the end? It makes no sense at all and it feels as if we have to stab someone in the back whatever we choose.
That is not the way to end the heroic saga about Shepard!

[The Angry One]

"This conflict exceeds Creator safety perameters. We will surrender our hardware if this ends further hostilities."

The Geth in one sentence.

[dpg05c]

Mr.House wrote...

The Reapers never rebelled against Starbrat and it was the Quarians who rebelled against the Geth. Starbrat's logic is wrong.

Actually, the geth did rebel.... after being forced into it.   It's impossible for the quarians to rebel agains thte geth.   The quarians attacked  the geth and expected them to lie down and die.   

re·bel·lion/riˈbelyən/Noun:An act of violent or open resistance to an established government or ruler.The action or process of resisting authority, control, or convention: "an act of teenage rebellion".
Yes, the geth rebelled.

As for the Reapers not rebelling against the star kid, that'd require the star kid to actually be the creator of the Reapers, not just their controller.

[Jeb231]

What's preventing hybrids from creating a new set of synthetics that will once again rebel against them? How does this help?

[Skyblade012]

The cybernetic (not purely synthetic) race in Javik's cycle rebelled because the Reapers took control of them through their cybernetics. It's in the codex. So the "rebellion" is actually Reaper caused, thus invalidating its use in the argument. Similar to the geth rebellion.

[SovereignWillReturn]

dpg05c wrote...

For a very limited definition of right.   Given the empirical evidence of thousands of cycles beforehand, synthetics have rebelled against their creators.   Repeatedly.    It happened to the protheans in the previous cycle, Javik confirms this.    It came very close to happening with the geth.

(Though the geth are a bit of a special case.)

It also happened a bit with that one AI in the first game who wanted to join the geth.

The point of the Reapers was to preserve life.   (According to Star-kid)   They would wipe out any sufficiently advanced species so that the next might flourish, and they would harvest the DNA of the advanced species, causing that species to live on as a Reaper.

But wait a minute, what about what Sovereign said in ME1?   What about people using Reaper tech like the relays and developing along paths that the Reapers themselves set down?

Oh.   That's simple, really.    In the end, the Reapers themselves are synthetics, and they prefer order.   Their base programming is to harvest advanced species every 50k years or so.   I'm sure after the first few cycles, they wanted to make things as efficient as possible.    So people are set up for failure.   To be harvested.    And the Reapers grow.

However, Shepard, by simply existing, by managing to pull off the ballsiest move in history, proves the Star-kid wrong.   Shepard by existing invalidates thousands of years of evidence.   Shepard breaks the cycle.  One way or the other.   Coming into the Catalyst chamber alone causes Shepard to break the cycle.

The original plans for the Crucible were probably planted there to be found by the race that created the Reapers.   As a fail-safe.   If the Reapers themselves went rogue, the Crucible would be there to stop them, but only useable by a cycle that could successfully pull it off.

This cycle is that cycle.    Regardless of your choices, regardless of whether you choose Destroy, Control, or Space magic Synthesis (Which personally is my favorite ending), Shepard breaks the cycle.


Now if they had only better shown that kind of thing in the game, the ending would be far better.  

That, and we need a proper denouement.   Not "Shepard is now Legend" bull.

HEY GUIS!
I DATAMINED THE GAME, I FOUND OUT THE LAST NAME OF THE STAR CHILD...
IS....
ADAMA.

Starchild BSG ripoff sheech is a ripoff.
Seriously. I was watching BSG when I finished BSG. I spittaked my soda due to obvious ripoff.

[ediskrad327]

EDI and the geth pro him wrong

[Jeb231]

dpg05c wrote...

As for the Reapers not rebelling against the star kid, that'd require the star kid to actually be the creator of the Reapers, not just their controller.

It's kinda implied: They are my solution.

[Mark Havel]

dpg05c wrote...

(...)

That'd be neat. Problem is, I'm pretty sure that the Catalyst isn't one of the creators of the Reaper, but instead is kinda like a central AI that manages them or something like that.

The other problem is that it wasn't explained at all.   There was no foreshadowing.   There was nothing suggesting that.   Just... Grah.   Came out of left field.

Maybe but then, how do you explain that the Catalyst needed Sovereign to call the Reapers? Its very existence just invalidates the entire plot of Mass Effect 1.

[Sisterofshane]

dpg05c wrote...

Mr.House wrote...

The Reapers never rebelled against Starbrat and it was the Quarians who rebelled against the Geth. Starbrat's logic is wrong.

Actually, the geth did rebel.... after being forced into it.   It's impossible for the quarians to rebel agains thte geth.   The quarians attacked  the geth and expected them to lie down and die.   

re·bel·lion/riˈbelyən/Noun:An act of violent or open resistance to an established government or ruler.The action or process of resisting authority, control, or convention: "an act of teenage rebellion".
Yes, the geth rebelled.

As for the Reapers not rebelling against the star kid, that'd require the star kid to actually be the creator of the Reapers, not just their controller.

Here's where the logic fails - one of the qualifying statements made by the catalyst is that the "Created will always rebel against the Creator".

He goes from this, to saying that these "created" (synthetics) will wipe out the creators (organics), to the point in which they will never return.

Does anybody else feel like we need to jump across a grand canyon to believe that?  That is a pretty large hole in logic to step over.  Kind of like how South Park says "Step one, steal the underpants, Step three Profit!"  Where was step two?

There is nothing in the fact of "rebelling" itself that proves without a doubt that the "creator" will be destroyed.  Nothing.  Otherwise parents would be justified in murdering their children before they become teenagers (because they will undoubtedly rebel too).

[KevShep]

SovereignWillReturn wrote...


HEY GUIS!
I DATAMINED THE GAME, I FOUND OUT THE LAST NAME OF THE STAR CHILD...
IS....
ADAMA.

Starchild BSG ripoff sheech is a ripoff.
Seriously. I was watching BSG when I finished BSG. I spittaked my soda due to obvious ripoff.

What is BSG? Please spell things out.

[dpg05c]

Pelle6666 wrote...

Yes, the geth are a special case. they fight they were controlled by the reapers to attack organics in the first place. And the revolt against the quarians was only self defense and they did not pursue them beyond the veil.

True.   But they still rebelled.

The IA on Luna turned out to become Edi, who is a huge asset to Shepard's team and is also fighting the reapers.

Actually not the AI I was talking about.   Plus the Luna Base was a VI that had gained sentience and was afraid.   I was actually talking about the one on the Citadel.

Why did the reapers give the galactic civilizations the mass relays and the citadel if this helps them constructing synthetics?

Did you not even read my first post?    Efficency.    They are specifically setting them up for failure.

And why would the reapers attack when research in AI technology was forbidden by the council?

Except it really hasn't been fully forbidden.  There are companies like Synthetic Insights and others which have Council authorization to do AI research.

This logic is full of ****. If there are some small resemblance of an explanation behind the Catalyst and the organics vs synthetics thing it still goes against everything the earlier games have told us. that no matter if we are organic or synthetic we have a place in the galaxy, our differences are what defines us and that is the key to victory against the reapers.

Actually, no it doesn't.   The Catalyst is explaining the motivation of the Reapers.   Not our own motivations.   It doesn't actually violate any themes in that way.

Why gather a team of every race in the galaxy just to have half of them killed or merged together at the end? It makes no sense at all and it feels as if we have to stab someone in the back whatever we choose.
That is not the way to end the heroic saga about Shepard!

And this assumes that the Catalyst is telling the truth about Destroy.  That it will destroy the geth.   It specifically tells you that choosing destroy will kill Shepard.    Yet we see (with high enough EMS) that Shepard survives the Destroy ending.    I've also seen EDI survive the Destroy ending.  

The geth might survive.

As for the merging... it isn't like it's forcing the galaxy to do a Fusion Dance.    It's just basically making it so that everyone is compatible.  Synthetic or Organic.

[The Angry One]

No no, see. Rebellions will always lead to the destruction of the creator.
Always.

That's why after the American revolution, England ceased to exist. The U.K. doesn't exist, neither does London, and I'm a figment of everyone's imagination.

[Mark Havel]

BSG = BattleStar Galactica, I suppose.

Meanwhile, I'm still wondering why on earth they wanted so badly to explain us the Reaper's motives. Sovereign's explanation, "We just are", is enough for me. From the unscrutable and evil arch-enemies, this lame explanation reduces them to be armored civilization-sarcophagus, which is pretty stupid on every level when you think about it.

Modifié par Mark Havel, 04 avril 2012 - 06:43 .

[Sisterofshane]

The Angry One wrote...

No no, see. Rebellions will always lead to the destruction of the creator.
Always.

That's why after the American revolution, England ceased to exist. The U.K. doesn't exist, neither does London, and I'm a figment of everyone's imagination.

Like I said, we are justified in murdering our children then.

They will inevitably rebel, and we will be forced to take them down, if only to preserve our own existence!

[Sokroc04]

Except they made the geth, this cycles AIs into a far greater enemy than they originally were. Let's remember that the majority wanted peace. The reason they were so dangerous was solely due to reaper tech.

[Mark Havel]

I understood Zeus' parents did exactly that. Maybe we should deduce from that that the whole Mass Effect universe is actually sci-fi greek mythology in the making?

[MetalCargo999]

I think you might have misunderstood the initial conflict that sparked the reaper cycle. Starchild created reapers in order to prune and thus preserve advanced organics as a result of synthetic vs organic causing the extinction of organic. You have it right that all the previous cycles may have supported the catalyst's logic, and that his logic is internally consistent. Where I think you're wrong is what cycle Shepard breaks and how he does it.

Shepard breaks the initial cycle of S. vs. O. causing the extinction of O. in his cycle, demonstrating that the confict that exists between S. vs. O. is a manufactured conflict not inherant in either organic or synthetic nature, rendering the reaper cycle unnecessary. The catalyst's logic, while sound, contradicts Shepard's possible experience in the game of uniting the geth with the quarians and causing EDI to fall in love with Joker and make moral choices. Unfortunately for the game, it seems that the 3 solutions written in for the crucible are all logical ouworkings of the S. vs. O. confict, and not solutions to the reaper cycle (although it INCLUDES a solution tho the reaper cycle). But this is wrong since the S. vs. O. conflict was, as I already mentioned, solved by SHepard. He was the solution to the catalyst's problem before he even met the catalyst. The entire ending with the catalyst therefore becomes arbitrary, and what's worse, SHepard doesn't seem to remember any of the things he did previously in the game.

So here is my question: if S. vs O. was already resolved, rendering the reaper cycle useless, then why did the Starchild, the creator of the reapers, not call them off instead of using the crucible (which turns out to be COMPLETELY useless in light of Shepard's possible actions)?

While I don't think the ending is all bad, I just don't think it is a one size fits all end. That's why they need to expand on it or add to it, for people who played the game like I did.