230 réponses à ce sujet

[DJBare]

Makrys wrote...

 I wrote this in another thread, but then decided it would work best as its own thread. This is my view on why I find the IT so interesting. Whether you believe in it or not, you have to admit, its pretty neat. Also, not trying to say its true, so no one needs to get defensive of their views. Just expressing why I enjoy the theory. Feel free to spout off if you agree or disagree. 

----------

From a certain point of view, when I think about it... the IT is brilliant. Simply because it shows that the best of us can still fall to evil. It shows that no one is perfect and that even someone so pure and strong willed as Shepard still has to fight with his heart and mind just as much as with his arms and legs. It would imply that even the mightiest can fall, and the fact that it is that which almost breaks us that defines us (most evident in the 'destroy' ending). Shepard's will almost broke him, but in the end, it is what saved him and the galaxy. 

"You are remarkably strong-willed, Commander." - Liara T'Soni

Shepard battling indoctrination throughout his quest against the Reapers is such a harrowing thought. How could he possibly hold up with all the pressure he has, PLUS Reapers trying to take over his mind. It would be a grand symbol of fighting an evil within yourself while also fighting the evil in physical form. The greatest battle.

"Shepard is my battle-master. He has no match." - Grunt

Shepard could never rest. He would literally have to give his everything in order to keep his mind his own if he were to then try and save the galaxy. The IT is fascinating to people because it embodies a mysterious paradigm that sometimes what we think is real, may actually just be our minds playing tricks on us. It is fascinating because it would be the ultimate test of will to deny something so monstrous slowly trying to seep its way into your pysche. All the while you are fighting the external forces of that very thing which is currently trying to invade you internally. 

"I just want to know: Is the person I followed to hell and back still in there?" - Kaidan Alenko

Think about it, whether you think the evidence is there or not, the IT is really a neat thing. And it culminates in ME3. Shepard, at the height of his stress and feelings of pressure, is beginning to become weakened through the Reapers continued (as of yet unknown) influence. All throughout the game, as Shepard is struggling and fighting to unite the galaxy an internal war rages inside of him and the only visual manifistation of that is in his nightmares. The boy isn't real, but instead a tool of the Reapers to try and break Shepard's will. Seeing the boy run from Shepard, through a dim, grim, and just downright freaky forest, is without a doubt confusing and wearisome for him. He doesn't know why he's running, he doesn't understand the forest, the voices... all of it is a mystery to him. All he knows is that when he finally catches up to the boy, the boy immediately catches flame and burns before his eyes to Shepard's horror. He then wakes up terrified - worried, that maybe he can't save everyone. That maybe despite his best efforts he can't accomplish what he desires. That maybe... he really can't save the galaxy. This would all weigh heavily on his mind as he tries to UNITE it. 

"You cojole, and threaten, and make tremendous sacrifices, until the galaxy realizes it has someone worth following." - Liara
"You think so?" - Shepard
"There's no doubt in my mind." - Liara

And when Harbinger's beam strikes and the ensuing dream takes place (within the IT) Shepard experiences the truest 'test' of will. The Reapers stop at nothing here, pulling no punches, in a last ditch effort to indoctrinate Shepard. And why you say? Why not just kill him? Shepard is an extremely valuable asset. Killing him would provide nothing for the Reapers. But indoctrination? An indoctrinated Shepard could mislead his allies, betray them to the Reapers, and they would be left leaderless and ready to fall. Without Shepard, not only does the Catalyst not fire, but the Reapers can later 'dissolve' Shepard in order to transfer his DNA into a future human Reaper. I'm sure the Reapers are impressed by Shepard (however much they may deny it), and so him as a tool is much more benficial to them, then having him simply dead.

"You cannot escape your destiny, Shepard." - Harbinger

I could go on and on about why I think the IT is so fascinating, and why I believe there is plenty enough to support its case of validity, but the main point stands: Bioware has to explain the ending. And the IT would seemingly be the best avenue to do so (in my opinion). We won't know anything for some time, but for the people who are anti-IT, I encourage you to look deeper into it. It really does make some very valid sense. Now you can argue whether or not you think Bioware will use it, but if you can comb through all the documented findings and gathered information in support of the IT (mainly Acayvos' YouTube video) and you still don't believe it, I would be a little shocked. But alas, everyone has an opinion on the matter and if you don't think its credible I respect your opinion and whatever facts you bring forth to support it.

I just find the IT to be really, really cool because it represents in a way our own deep internal struggles to battle with our own demons. And it's just interesting to see something similar manifest in a much more intense and direct way in Shepard. Our greatest hero.

Ok, nerd rage over.

My feelings to the letter, I still remain a skeptic as far as IT goes despite my sig, but I have a difficult time understanding those who totally balk at the idea(accept if true, we did not get the full game, this I understand), I am personally ready for an ME3 part 2, wake up, get away from starbrat and back into the real action, even if that means fighting your way to the citadel/crucible a second time, I want to see ME/Shepard go out with a crescendo not this whimper we currently experience.

[DiebytheSword]

HiddenKING wrote to someone else but I'm cutting in...

Some are facts, other depend entirely for the player to play the game in a specific way, and others are irrelevant. But none of your points can be used to prove with absolute certainty that Shepard is Indoctrinated. 

C'Mon HK, pick up the guantlet.

I've given a fairly airtight case that the Reapers are in Shepards head, though not neccesarily indoctrinated yet.  I have made my claim, and I'm ready to defend it.  You keep making yours, but your case and my case cannot coexist.  Explain how the Reapers are not in Shepards head.

[OdanUrr]

DiebytheSword wrote...

HiddenKING wrote to someone else but I'm cutting in...

Some are facts, other depend entirely for the player to play the game in a specific way, and others are irrelevant. But none of your points can be used to prove with absolute certainty that Shepard is Indoctrinated. 

C'Mon HK, pick up the guantlet.

I've given a fairly airtight case that the Reapers are in Shepards head, though not neccesarily indoctrinated yet.  I have made my claim, and I'm ready to defend it.  You keep making yours, but your case and my case cannot coexist.  Explain how the Reapers are not in Shepards head.

I'll gladly pick up that gauntlet if you give me facts that prove beyond a reasonable doubt that Shepard is indoctrinated or being indoctrinated. Only, in that case, it would no longer be a theory, would it? Otherwise, my interpretation of the events can be just as valid as yours.

[DiebytheSword]

OdanUrr wrote...

DiebytheSword wrote...

HiddenKING wrote to someone else but I'm cutting in...

Some are facts, other depend entirely for the player to play the game in a specific way, and others are irrelevant. But none of your points can be used to prove with absolute certainty that Shepard is Indoctrinated. 

C'Mon HK, pick up the guantlet.

I've given a fairly airtight case that the Reapers are in Shepards head, though not neccesarily indoctrinated yet.  I have made my claim, and I'm ready to defend it.  You keep making yours, but your case and my case cannot coexist.  Explain how the Reapers are not in Shepards head.

I'll gladly pick up that gauntlet if you give me facts that prove beyond a reasonable doubt that Shepard is indoctrinated or being indoctrinated. Only, in that case, it would no longer be a theory, would it? Otherwise, my interpretation of the events can be just as valid as yours.

Starchild has either taken the appearance of a child from Shepard's memories, or is the child from the beginning.  Thus, the Reapers have been in Shepards head all along, or have been working on it and achieved a breakthrough at the end.

So my challenge will be the same to you, if they are not in Shepard's head, how did they come upon the idea to use that specific child as an image to present Shepard with.

The child is clearly pulled from Shepard's head, regardless of whether IT is 100% right or not (I feel it is not), the Catalyst/GUARDIAN has access to Shepard's memories.

I respect your right to have an opinion, and welcome varying viewpoints on the ending.  I want to know why people write off posibilities as impossible without having concrete proof themselves.  I'm open to the possibility that IT was completely wrong, I just happen to think that its unlikely.

HK does not use unlikely terms, he uses absolutes.

So, explain to me how and why the Starchild chose that visage if the ending was literal and the Reapers had no access to Shepard's memories.

[HiddenKING]

DiebytheSword wrote...

HiddenKING wrote to someone else but I'm cutting in...

Some are facts, other depend entirely for the player to play the game in a specific way, and others are irrelevant. But none of your points can be used to prove with absolute certainty that Shepard is Indoctrinated. 

C'Mon HK, pick up the guantlet.

I've given a fairly airtight case that the Reapers are in Shepards head, though not neccesarily indoctrinated yet.  I have made my claim, and I'm ready to defend it.  You keep making yours, but your case and my case cannot coexist.  Explain how the Reapers are not in Shepards head.

The Catalysts' form is irrelevant.

It could be simple conincidence, Shepard's mind perceivin it that way, or as you say the Catalyst has chosen said form from Shepard's own memories.  Or any other reason.

But all are speculation, and none is anymore valid than the other. And none of them help the case of Shepard's indoctrination.

[U7tra]

To the OP, *excellent* post. Really good exploration of exactly where the impetus of the IT comes from. Pretty similar to my own thoughts on it.

And just to contribute to the conversation, I was SO pumped until the end of the Stargazer scene. During my *first* playthrough, not having read anything online about the endings, I saw a lot of the IT clues and literally just assumed that's what was happening during the final 10 minutes (obviously not in as refined a manner.)

The explosion scenes, the credits, even the Stargazer didn't discourage me from this at first, and here's why: Years ago on the original Xbox I played a game called Advent Rising. It was childish, but super fun. And the story was written by Orson Scott Card. The end of the game was great and wrapped up the major struggle, but left some things unanswered regarding people and events from earlier in the game.

If you watched the credits completely through, you were rewarded with not only a cinematic... but a final boss fight. It simultaneously answered a lot of questions from earlier in the game and raised a lot more questions. (The game was intended to be the first of a trilogy, but the latter 2 games were cancelled because it didn't sell well and Majesco was having money problems.)

In any case, I honestly expected this to be an epic-after credits conclusion like that. Credits roll, Stargazer says "Okay... one. More. Story." And Shepard wakes up for the final fight against Harbinger.

I even saw Shepard wake up! (I've been waiting for the destroy option for 5 years - *yes* I automatically took it.) ...But instead of the final fight, I got the now-infamous DLC message.

I even figured they'd release the "true" ending later having planned it all along. Lost some faith in that over the next few weeks as Final Hours and other sources seem to show that IT wasn't intentional.

I hope it was. It *could* be the perfect solution. Not *is,* but *could* be.

[DiebytheSword]

HiddenKING wrote...

DiebytheSword wrote...

HiddenKING wrote to someone else but I'm cutting in...

Some are facts, other depend entirely for the player to play the game in a specific way, and others are irrelevant. But none of your points can be used to prove with absolute certainty that Shepard is Indoctrinated. 

C'Mon HK, pick up the guantlet.

I've given a fairly airtight case that the Reapers are in Shepards head, though not neccesarily indoctrinated yet.  I have made my claim, and I'm ready to defend it.  You keep making yours, but your case and my case cannot coexist.  Explain how the Reapers are not in Shepards head.

The Catalysts' form is irrelevant.

It could be simple conincidence, Shepard's mind perceivin it that way, or as you say the Catalyst has chosen said form from Shepard's own memories.  Or any other reason.

But all are speculation, and none is anymore valid than the other. And none of them help the case of Shepard's indoctrination.

Which is why you dismiss IT out of hand, amirite?

Simple coincidence you say, and yet you claim others are reaching.  And you are now saying something I agree with, nothing is certain, because the ending was written to cause speculation.  There is literally not enough information to make a definitive statement.

Statements like IT is fake.  IT is something to make you feel better.  Statements people throw around without knowing for sure themselves.

Oh, and the Catalysts form is very relavent.  It is evidence that you claim does not exist.  It either chose a form from Shepard's memories, was an indoctrination attempt from the very beginning, or is a complete coincidence.  I ask you which ones are more likely, and which ones are more of a stretch.

And in total fairness, you cannot truly dispose, out of hand, any of the three.  There is not enough proof for the Reality Theory either.

[RinpocheSchnozberry]

The best part of IT is rebooting your computer when you aren't expecting it.

[OdanUrr]

DiebytheSword wrote...

Starchild has either taken the appearance of a child from Shepard's memories, or is the child from the beginning.  Thus, the Reapers have been in Shepards head all along, or have been working on it and achieved a breakthrough at the end.

So my challenge will be the same to you, if they are not in Shepard's head, how did they come upon the idea to use that specific child as an image to present Shepard with.

The child is clearly pulled from Shepard's head, regardless of whether IT is 100% right or not (I feel it is not), the Catalyst/GUARDIAN has access to Shepard's memories.

I respect your right to have an opinion, and welcome varying viewpoints on the ending.  I want to know why people write off posibilities as impossible without having concrete proof themselves.  I'm open to the possibility that IT was completely wrong, I just happen to think that its unlikely.

HK does not use unlikely terms, he uses absolutes.

So, explain to me how and why the Starchild chose that visage if the ending was literal and the Reapers had no access to Shepard's memories.

I agree with the underlined part 100%. However, I see it differently. Here I direct you to Crichton's Sphere as an example. In Sphere, the characters are shown their worst fears. It is not something concocted by the sphere itself, it is something they themselves have chosen, if unbeknownst to them. Likewise, I think the Catalyst probably took the form of the child because it was strongest in Shepard's thoughts having dreamt about him throughout the game.

EDIT: In case it's not clear, I'm saying Shepard is essentially choosing the form of the Catalyst, if only unconsciously so.

Modifié par OdanUrr, 02 mai 2012 - 04:19 .

[DiebytheSword]

OdanUrr wrote...

DiebytheSword wrote...

Starchild has either taken the appearance of a child from Shepard's memories, or is the child from the beginning.  Thus, the Reapers have been in Shepards head all along, or have been working on it and achieved a breakthrough at the end.

So my challenge will be the same to you, if they are not in Shepard's head, how did they come upon the idea to use that specific child as an image to present Shepard with.

The child is clearly pulled from Shepard's head, regardless of whether IT is 100% right or not (I feel it is not), the Catalyst/GUARDIAN has access to Shepard's memories.

I respect your right to have an opinion, and welcome varying viewpoints on the ending.  I want to know why people write off posibilities as impossible without having concrete proof themselves.  I'm open to the possibility that IT was completely wrong, I just happen to think that its unlikely.

HK does not use unlikely terms, he uses absolutes.

So, explain to me how and why the Starchild chose that visage if the ending was literal and the Reapers had no access to Shepard's memories.

I agree with the underlined part 100%. However, I see it differently. Here I direct you to Crichton's Sphere as an example. In Sphere, the characters are shown their worst fears. It is not something concocted by the sphere itself, it is something they themselves have chosen, if unbeknownst to them. Likewise, I think the Catalyst probably took the form of the child because it was strongest in Shepard's thoughts having dreamt about him throughout the game.

EDIT: In case it's not clear, I'm saying Shepard is essentially choosing the form of the Catalyst, if only unconsciously so.

That's perfectly plausible, and adds a fourth possible answer to our conundrum.  It still does not dismiss out of hand the other three exlanations that have been offered.

My problem with this idea, is that it requires a new altogether unkown thing to explain the form the Catalyst/GUARDIAN takes.  The Reapers just refelect what you're deepest disturbing thing is?  I think it is far more plausible that they have retrieved a specific memory for maximum effect.  It fits with the established lore, and requires far less Deus Ex Machina to explain.

[DiebytheSword]

Tigerblood and Sharkshakes wrote...

Or maybe in fact
shepard is just a simluation run by harbinger to ready themselfs for the galatic cleansing

you cant prove or disprove it.i must be right i win

I'm going to pretend thats not a dig at me that's totally pointless and ineffective.

It has never been my position that HK's idea is impossible, only that he's an ass for saying everyone elses ideas are. 

Come at me bro.

On the other hand you could just be cracking wise, in which case, meh, it wasn't that funny.

[balance5050]

nm, i'm sleepy

Modifié par balance5050, 02 mai 2012 - 04:49 .

[dreman9999]

HiddenKING wrote...



Some are facts, other depend entirely for the player to play the game in a specific way, and others are irrelevant. But none of your points can be used to prove with absolute certainty that Shepard is Indoctrinated. 

No all are facts. I'll post them so we can go over them.
Fact 1. People are indoctrinated by being near reapers and reaper tech. 
^This has been stated from ME1....Add, in the  codex it statesreaper agents and huck give out indoctination waves as well. Plent husk 1  in ME1 shows dragons teeth can indoctrinate. pLANET hUNSK 2 shows reaper artifacts can indoctrinate and turn people to husk.

Fact 2. People that at are under the process of indoctrination here whispers.
^Ever person under the prosses of indoctrination or indoctrinated  complain of whispers


Fact 3.Shepard is near allot of reaper tech through out ME1 and ME2.
^This is something that is obvious....Shepard has been near reaper tech since  Eden Prime in ME1. Even with out the subquests, that still is 3 years wurth of on and off contact.

Fact 4. Shepard is hit by an indoctrination field in the arrival dlc, in which he see's visions
and hears voices....
^This clearly happens in arrival...And even if the player did play this dlc, there is still fact 3 that shows Shepard has been indoctrinated by other means anyway.
Fact 5.Indoctrination does not just go away...http://masseffect.wi.../Rana_Thanoptis



'If Rana survived Mass Effect and Mass Effect 2, she will appear in an ANN Report on
indoctrination. She has apparently murdered several top asari officials and
then committed suicide. While in custody, Thanoptis reported "voices"
in her head (a typical symptom of indoctrination) to investigators."

^To deny this is to also ingnore Shela as well, who only is able to with stand indoctrination because of the thorian sporse


Fact 6. The reapers can manipulate dreams...http://www.youtube.c...JFRvDUp4#t=690s

The reseachers on project rho in Arrival also taked about strange dreams  when they were being indoctrinated.

http://www.youtube.c...tYTITiTw#t=249s 


^There is a 3rd sorce for this too but with these two sourses, it makes it obvious with out it.

Fact 7. Reapers can indoctrinatewith quantum intanglement.http://masseffect.wikia.com/wiki/Codex/Arrival:_The_Reapers'_Secrets 

The third discovery is that the object broadcasts signals and information on many different spectra. One such pulse, suspected to be similar to a quantum entanglement communicator, reaches into. Another broadcast is infrasound, consistent with frequencies that trigger feelings of awe and fear in , a known factor in Reaper indoctrination. Kenson's laboratory is filled with equipment dedicated to monitoring any signal coming from the artifact in the hopes that some clue will prove the Reapers' undoing before it's too late. "
^ME:RETRUBUTION  also state this as well. This is how reaper control agents and husk from darkspace. This is how they control them even now.

Fact 8. You hear whispers in sheps dreams....^I'm not talking about the whispers from you dead squad.....I mean the back ground noise. Those are whispers.

This is something to understand with deductive logic. These fact are solid. The only fact that is not is anything that directly and absolutly show that Shep is indoctrinated...But that's the funny thing about indoctrination, that doesn't show up untill it's too late. IT is a theory that  Shep is still in the process of start ofindoctrination...He is not in an advance stage yet.

Modifié par dreman9999, 02 mai 2012 - 04:55 .

[dreman9999]

HiddenKING wrote...

DiebytheSword wrote...

HiddenKING wrote to someone else but I'm cutting in...

Some are facts, other depend entirely for the player to play the game in a specific way, and others are irrelevant. But none of your points can be used to prove with absolute certainty that Shepard is Indoctrinated. 

C'Mon HK, pick up the guantlet.

I've given a fairly airtight case that the Reapers are in Shepards head, though not neccesarily indoctrinated yet.  I have made my claim, and I'm ready to defend it.  You keep making yours, but your case and my case cannot coexist.  Explain how the Reapers are not in Shepards head.

The Catalysts' form is irrelevant.

It could be simple conincidence, Shepard's mind perceivin it that way, or as you say the Catalyst has chosen said form from Shepard's own memories.  Or any other reason.

But all are speculation, and none is anymore valid than the other. And none of them help the case of Shepard's indoctrination.

But that would mean it a halutionation....Which is what IT state is going on......That still supports IT. Also, there is no proof the ending really happened anyway.

[dreman9999]

OdanUrr wrote...

DiebytheSword wrote...

HiddenKING wrote to someone else but I'm cutting in...

Some are facts, other depend entirely for the player to play the game in a specific way, and others are irrelevant. But none of your points can be used to prove with absolute certainty that Shepard is Indoctrinated. 

C'Mon HK, pick up the guantlet.

I've given a fairly airtight case that the Reapers are in Shepards head, though not neccesarily indoctrinated yet.  I have made my claim, and I'm ready to defend it.  You keep making yours, but your case and my case cannot coexist.  Explain how the Reapers are not in Shepards head.

I'll gladly pick up that gauntlet if you give me facts that prove beyond a reasonable doubt that Shepard is indoctrinated or being indoctrinated. Only, in that case, it would no longer be a theory, would it? Otherwise, my interpretation of the events can be just as valid as yours.

You do know that base on the lore, indoctionation has no proof of it till after the person is indoctrinated...Right?

[OdanUrr]

DiebytheSword wrote...

That's perfectly plausible, and adds a fourth possible answer to our conundrum.  It still does not dismiss out of hand the other three exlanations that have been offered.

My problem with this idea, is that it requires a new altogether unkown thing to explain the form the Catalyst/GUARDIAN takes.  The Reapers just refelect what you're deepest disturbing thing is?  I think it is far more plausible that they have retrieved a specific memory for maximum effect.  It fits with the established lore, and requires far less Deus Ex Machina to explain.

The Catalyst and the Reapers are different entities. If we hardly know that much about the Reapers, and we spent three games learning about them, then we can't expect to know much about the Catalyst, having been introduced in the last ten minutes of the game. Just because he says he controls the Reapers it doesn't mean he has the same abilities or that he acts in a similar manner.

[OdanUrr]

dreman9999 wrote...

You do know that base on the lore, indoctionation has no proof of it till after the person is indoctrinated...Right?

That was the point I was trying to make.

[balance5050]

OdanUrr wrote...

DiebytheSword wrote...

That's perfectly plausible, and adds a fourth possible answer to our conundrum.  It still does not dismiss out of hand the other three exlanations that have been offered.

My problem with this idea, is that it requires a new altogether unkown thing to explain the form the Catalyst/GUARDIAN takes.  The Reapers just refelect what you're deepest disturbing thing is?  I think it is far more plausible that they have retrieved a specific memory for maximum effect.  It fits with the established lore, and requires far less Deus Ex Machina to explain.

The Catalyst and the Reapers are different entities. If we hardly know that much about the Reapers, and we spent three games learning about them, then we can't expect to know much about the Catalyst, having been introduced in the last ten minutes of the game. Just because he says he controls the Reapers it doesn't mean he has the same abilities or that he acts in a similar manner.

He refers to himself and the reaper as "we" so that's good enough for me.

Modifié par balance5050, 02 mai 2012 - 04:58 .

[balance5050]

OdanUrr wrote...

dreman9999 wrote...

You do know that base on the lore, indoctionation has no proof of it till after the person is indoctrinated...Right?

That was the point I was trying to make.

OK cool! So you agree that it's posiible then! Awesome!

[OdanUrr]

balance5050 wrote...

He refers to himself and the reaper as "we" so that's good enough for me.

Doesn't Saren ask Shepard to "join us" in ME1? Somehow, I don't think he's on a par with the Reapers.

[dreman9999]

OdanUrr wrote...

DiebytheSword wrote...

That's perfectly plausible, and adds a fourth possible answer to our conundrum.  It still does not dismiss out of hand the other three exlanations that have been offered.

My problem with this idea, is that it requires a new altogether unkown thing to explain the form the Catalyst/GUARDIAN takes.  The Reapers just refelect what you're deepest disturbing thing is?  I think it is far more plausible that they have retrieved a specific memory for maximum effect.  It fits with the established lore, and requires far less Deus Ex Machina to explain.

The Catalyst and the Reapers are different entities. If we hardly know that much about the Reapers, and we spent three games learning about them, then we can't expect to know much about the Catalyst, having been introduced in the last ten minutes of the game. Just because he says he controls the Reapers it doesn't mean he has the same abilities or that he acts in a similar manner.

Before we start and saying what is what....Can you prove what happen at the cataylyst Scene really happened?  Also, all indevisuals are differnent enities...Reaper fit the bill of an entaty any way be that they are need less machines. The  star child, if take at fact value, still is in charge of the reapers...He is key to their planning...And last time I checked, they have a historyof great deseption...Also, we have no proof the shar child is telling the truth any way.

[OdanUrr]

balance5050 wrote...

OdanUrr wrote...

dreman9999 wrote...

You do know that base on the lore, indoctionation has no proof of it till after the person is indoctrinated...Right?

That was the point I was trying to make.

OK cool! So you agree that it's posiible then! Awesome!

Impossible is nothing, that's my motto.

[U7tra]

balance5050 wrote...

He refers to himself and the reaper as "we" so that's good enough for me.

+1. "I know you've thought about destroying us."

Face value = No, Shepard has never thought about destroying the Reapers + the Catalyst.

He's only thought about destroying the Reapers.

So Starkid is grammatically sloppy/inaccurate, or he inadvertently betrays his own identity as a Reaper.

[dreman9999]

OdanUrr wrote...

balance5050 wrote...

He refers to himself and the reaper as "we" so that's good enough for me.

Doesn't Saren ask Shepard to "join us" in ME1? Somehow, I don't think he's on a par with the Reapers.

That just means Saren feels he is part of the reapers group. Which is what  Balance5050 is saying about the star child.