55528 réponses à ce sujet

[D.Sharrah]

Lord Goose wrote...

"Keep in mind, that in the original script, Reapers allowed organic races to prosper only to harvest them later and create new Reapers to find solution to the spread of dark matter. Organic vs AI problem wasn't addressed."

But the script was changed...that doesn't apply any more.  To bring it up as an arguement against anything is pointless.

It's like people that say Tolkien originally intended Frodo to die in Mt Doom...doesn't matter, that's not what the stroy ultimately ended up being, so to argue its merits against what actually happened is asinine.

Modifié par D.Sharrah, 28 mai 2012 - 04:13 .

[Bill Casey]

paxxton wrote...

What puzzles me is the fact that the Reapers acknowledge that they let organics develop along the lines they desire by having given them the Mass Relays. So it may be that in order for a species to be useful for harvesting and reproduction it has to have a higher level of technological development. Why?

Because they also harvest the technology...
They strip everything bare, man and machine...

Modifié par Bill Casey, 28 mai 2012 - 04:13 .

[Ytook]

If there are reapers left in dark space then destroy is still the best option, of they are holding forces back then why would Shepard be able to maintain control or that control is even an option as the reapers seem to have taken into account this happening, and synthesis leaves the reapers still alive and able to regroup with their entire force, better to destroy the ones in the galaxy so the rest are at a serious disadvantage. Also I'm pretty sure that the Rannoch reaper is referring to the Geth Quarian war and that the reapers are waiting for Shepard after that.

[D.Sharrah]

Ok...I unfortunately have to work tomorrow (at least it is a very short day)...so I need to go to bed. If you ladies and gents could keep the new page count under 20 over night that would really help my efforts at catching up again tomorrow. Either that, or be prepared to present Cliff's Notes for the evenings/early mornings activities...

[paxxton]

MACharlie1 wrote...

I don't get where anyone states that civilization is thrust into the stone age.

Didn't Weekes come out and say that civilization isn't in the stone age and that the Reapers are to be salvaged for FTL ships?

Technology is also destroyed. FTL drives are not as fast as mass relay. Or if they are - then Starchild's logic regains validity because FTL is not something given by Reapers - it's a law of "physics" unless the Reapers create the reality too.

Mr. Weekes' speculation is the same as when he said that everybody on the Citadel is still alive during PAX. Yeah, right, like the Reapers leave obvious loose ends. Well, he's right about the people on the Citadel if this is all a hallucination (IT).

Modifié par paxxton, 28 mai 2012 - 04:21 .

[MACharlie1]

paxxton wrote...

MACharlie1 wrote...

I don't get where anyone states that civilization is thrust into the stone age.

Didn't Weekes come out and say that civilization isn't in the stone age and that the Reapers are to be salvaged for FTL ships?

Technology is also destroyed. FTL drives are not as fast as mass relay. Or if they are - then Starchild's logic regains validity because FTL is not something given by Reapers - it's a law of "physics" unless the Reapers create the reality too.

Mr. Weekes' speculation is the same as when he said that everybody on the Citadel is still alive during PAX. Yeah, right, like the Reapers leave obvious loose ends. Well, he's right about the people on the Citadel if this is all a hallucination (IT).

I'm sorry but I'm afraid you didn't quite answer the question. Who says it is destroyed? Like whats the line? My apologies if I wasn't clear. 

[paxxton]

MACharlie1 wrote...

paxxton wrote...

MACharlie1 wrote...

I don't get where anyone states that civilization is thrust into the stone age.

Didn't Weekes come out and say that civilization isn't in the stone age and that the Reapers are to be salvaged for FTL ships?

Technology is also destroyed. FTL drives are not as fast as mass relay. Or if they are - then Starchild's logic regains validity because FTL is not something given by Reapers - it's a law of "physics" unless the Reapers create the reality too.

Mr. Weekes' speculation is the same as when he said that everybody on the Citadel is still alive during PAX. Yeah, right, like the Reapers leave obvious loose ends. Well, he's right about the people on the Citadel if this is all a hallucination (IT).

I'm sorry but I'm afraid you didn't quite answer the question. Who says it is destroyed? Like whats the line? My apologies if I wasn't clear. 

Starchild says it.

[Destructorlio]

spotlessvoid wrote...

I think the Reapers wipe out civilization for two reasons.
Organics are needed for reproduction and possibly sustenance.
To stop organics from developing enough to pose a threat to the Reapers

In fact, it's the British empirical model.
Uplift the populace enough to be useful, but keep them from catching up past a certain punt. Then reap the profits

While I don't disagree with this theory (it would certainly be logical, almost borg-like, to allow species to develop to a peak and then harvest them for materials), I often feel that Mass Effect was heavily influenced by a series of novels by Alistair Reynolds, which started with the novel Revelation Space.

The central arc of the Revelation Space series focuses on a machine-race called The Inhibitors. When humanity finally started travelling to the stars, they expected to find planets full of life. Instead, all they found were the remains of advanced civilizations, which seemed to have died out. Over time (and frequently via advanced AIs from these species giving out informatino) it becomes clear that, in the black reaches of space, there is an inert machine race called the Inhibitors, which detects sentient FTL travel. Once sentient FTL travel is detected, the machines start to power up and gain sentience themselves (they are only sentient as required- typically they remain non-sentient), a process that takes hundreds of years.

Their function is to 'inhibit' the development of a massive interstellar culture. Why? Because they realized, aeons ago, that an advanced culture was the only thing with the capabiltiy of destroying the galaxy. Sentience itself is the threat that they counter. Only sentient species dominate other species, harvest worlds for their own use, and possess massive destructive capability. So, in order to protect all other life, the inhibitors were created. 

Sound a bit familiar? When I first played ME1 I frequently thought of Revelation Space, and would not be surprised if the authors of ME drew inspiration from it. I think it would be an elegant motivation for the Reapers- not that they are malevolent, just that they recognize that sentient species are simply a threat to each other, and all life. This theme runs through Mass Effect- the way we hurt each other- think about it, every species in the ME universe tries to dominate another. Salarians use the genophage to stop the Krogan after uplifting them to fight the Rachni, Quarians use the Geth, humans fight the Turians. It all interlocks. When you speak to the Rannoch Reaper, I could have sworn he was about to reveal this greater purpose to me 'You cannot understand'. Mindless killing, that's not motivation. Killing billions to save all the life that doesn't go to war? I can see that. That's why Reapers never harvest lower forms of life- they are protecting them.

Not saying I agree with the motivation proscribed here, and I think one of the themes of the ME series is how Shepard convinces the races to cooperate, not fight, and so lifts them above the destruction the Reapers might accuse them of.

Anyway, I like that the Reaper motivation remains a mystery, but that has been the explanation in my head since ME1, and it's actually bourne out quite well. But I also like the idea that they are 'preserving' races in Reaper form, and that they are just harvesting us like wheat.

EDIT: Heh- check out the wiki on The Inhibitors, it contains this line:

"They do not actively monitor the galaxy in their wait for a new star faring culture to suppress, instead they plant a series of triggers near interesting phenomena or structures in the galaxy and wait for sapient life to activate those triggers. The Cerberus object around the neutron star Hades was one such object."

http://en.wikipedia....tors_.2F_Wolves

2nd EDIT: Not the first to point out this similarity, it seems:  http://social.biowar...ndex/11047193/1

Modifié par Destructorlio, 28 mai 2012 - 04:48 .

[MACharlie1]

paxxton wrote...

MACharlie1 wrote...

paxxton wrote...

MACharlie1 wrote...

I don't get where anyone states that civilization is thrust into the stone age.

Didn't Weekes come out and say that civilization isn't in the stone age and that the Reapers are to be salvaged for FTL ships?

Technology is also destroyed. FTL drives are not as fast as mass relay. Or if they are - then Starchild's logic regains validity because FTL is not something given by Reapers - it's a law of "physics" unless the Reapers create the reality too.

Mr. Weekes' speculation is the same as when he said that everybody on the Citadel is still alive during PAX. Yeah, right, like the Reapers leave obvious loose ends. Well, he's right about the people on the Citadel if this is all a hallucination (IT).

I'm sorry but I'm afraid you didn't quite answer the question. Who says it is destroyed? Like whats the line? My apologies if I wasn't clear. 

Starchild says it.

Line? I feel like I missed that part. 

It just seems odd: how can ANY civilization be knocked back to the stone age that space travel? You have literally thousands of geniuses who know how to take certain materials and make things out of them. It's not like the materials just go away or knowledge of how these things work goes away. Even if suddenly in our own society all of our technology stopped working, we'd still wouldn't be in a stone age. We have the materials and the smart people to get them working again. 

[paxxton]

Ytook wrote...

If there are reapers left in dark space then destroy is still the best option, of they are holding forces back then why would Shepard be able to maintain control or that control is even an option as the reapers seem to have taken into account this happening, and synthesis leaves the reapers still alive and able to regroup with their entire force, better to destroy the ones in the galaxy so the rest are at a serious disadvantage. Also I'm pretty sure that the Rannoch reaper is referring to the Geth Quarian war and that the reapers are waiting for Shepard after that.

Nope. If you destroy the Reapers in Milky Way you're left with nothing. If you control those you have an equal chances (much higher than now) in the fight against the remaining Reapers. The choices might have been presented out of desperation on the part of the Reapers because the Crucible is docked and ready to fire (self-preservation as slaves vs annihilation of a significant part of their kind).

[spotlessvoid]

@ destructorlio

interesting.

I actually hate the preservation of species idea.

What the heck are you even preserving? The gem of advanced organic life is sentience. You essentially destroy that which you claim to preserve.

Self determination is the natural right of all sentient life

[spotlessvoid]

Also, no way the Reapers are the pinnacle of evolution. So in effect, they repeatedly destroy the evolutionary processes. If anything, the Reapers are what Starchild supposedly warns will happen to organics.

IMO, any being that engages in the Reapers level of wanton destruction can only be motivated by selfish interests. Delusional justifications be damned

[HellishFiend]

byne wrote...

Lord Goose wrote...

developers did say that the
Reapers winning was a possibility of the
game...

In original scenario, Shepard had a choice to allow Reapers harvest humanity and create super-reaper which could stop spreading of dark-matter which would destroy the universe. Remember the sun which Tali studied in ME2? And all lines abut humans being special race with unique potential?

But they changed the script.

Even that isnt really a Reapers-win scenario though.

More of a 'We-allow-ourselves-to-be-harvested-so-that-everyone-else-wins' scenario

You know what, the more I think about it, the more I think that the whole "Dark Energy" thing wasnt actually going to ever be the real ending. 

I think there is one of two possibilities:

The "Dark Energy" ending was actually the Red Herring to throw off the players.

or

The "Dark Energy" explanation was going to be the Reapers' faux motivation that they presented to shepard instead of the preventing Synthetics destroying all Organics motivation. 

I find both of those possibilities more likely than "Dark Energy" being the actual ending. It seems to me like just another way of getting Shepard to come around to the Reapers' way of thinking. 

[paxxton]

MACharlie1 wrote...

paxxton wrote...

MACharlie1 wrote...

paxxton wrote...

MACharlie1 wrote...

I don't get where anyone states that civilization is thrust into the stone age.

Didn't Weekes come out and say that civilization isn't in the stone age and that the Reapers are to be salvaged for FTL ships?

Technology is also destroyed. FTL drives are not as fast as mass relay. Or if they are - then Starchild's logic regains validity because FTL is not something given by Reapers - it's a law of "physics" unless the Reapers create the reality too.

Mr. Weekes' speculation is the same as when he said that everybody on the Citadel is still alive during PAX. Yeah, right, like the Reapers leave obvious loose ends. Well, he's right about the people on the Citadel if this is all a hallucination (IT).

I'm sorry but I'm afraid you didn't quite answer the question. Who says it is destroyed? Like whats the line? My apologies if I wasn't clear. 

Starchild says it.

Line? I feel like I missed that part. 

It just seems odd: how can ANY civilization be knocked back to the stone age that space travel? You have literally thousands of geniuses who know how to take certain materials and make things out of them. It's not like the materials just go away or knowledge of how these things work goes away. Even if suddenly in our own society all of our technology stopped working, we'd still wouldn't be in a stone age. We have the materials and the smart people to get them working again. 

I believe he says "and most of technology." or something like that in one of the endings (presumably with low EMS).

This is analogous of the Internet going dark forever. There are still people that can do things but technology just makes it unnecessary to know everything at all times. In 100 years this would simply be unfeasible. I don't mean you can just bing (or google) knowledge, but the ebooks would also be wiped out off the storage devices.

EDIT: Anyway, Destroy destroys the Mass Relay network and that is unacceptable. In Control, the Citadel is intact and the Reapers can rebuild the network.

Modifié par paxxton, 28 mai 2012 - 05:16 .

[Destructorlio]

spotlessvoid wrote...

@ destructorlio

interesting.

I actually hate the preservation of species idea.

What the heck are you even preserving? The gem of advanced organic life is sentience. You essentially destroy that which you claim to preserve.

Self determination is the natural right of all sentient life

I agree with you that destroying sentient life to preserve nonsentient life is morally indefensible, however the Inhibitors themselves are not sentient so they probably do not make any distinction. All they see is one small group of animals dominating, killing, eating and displacing every other life form. They note that the small group of animals is always sentient/using technology/going faster than light. They run the math and calculate that if the small group was removed, all of the other groups would flourish (we are a disease and they are the cure, as Agent Smith might say). They remove the small group. Rinse and repeat. We only say sentience is the gem of organic life because we ourselves are sentient. There's no artibrary standard by which this would be measured, outside of our own judgment.

[StElmo]

This isn't an in-game clue, BUT.

Mass Effect 3 doesn't have a making of documentary, do you think this is because they were planning the indoctrination plot device and wanted to keep that kind of thing under wraps?

Instead, they put out thje final hours, which is more of a controlled, smaller tid bit?

Thoughts?

[gunslinger_ruiz]

Lord Goose wrote...

The represenation of a struggle in Shepard's mind could be unique to his.her experience, it's unclear if any previous famous Indoctrinatee's (Saren, The Illusive Man) went through a similar Hallucination where they were tricked into certain choices, but neither of them had Shepard's willpower.

As far as I remember, where is no real difference between huskification and indoctrination in general. Huskification is just rapid, because nanides are travelling fast. But any indoctrinated will eventually turn into husk.

Yes, but the main difference being the "huskified" appearance wouldn't happen immediately with "subtle" indoctrination. "But then wouldn't that debunk Shepard being 'huskified' with Control and Synthesis as a form of indoctrination?" Well that "evidence" can still stand true if it's all a hallucination, the "huskification" would be occuring to Shepard's brain.

what they were doing was "right" or "for the greater good" all the while everything they did was for the Reapers benefit.

We can obviously judge them by their deeds. Saren is trying to open Citadel for Reapers to come, and TIM is backstabbing humanity during the crysis. While we can't see Shepard working for Reapers in any ending.

We mostly can't see it (if it's true) because that is where the game currently ends. EC may clear some of this up once it releases, either that or completely dismiss the theory, but we'll have to wait and see.

The Destroyer on Rannoch says something similar, if anything we can derive that the Reapers are here to "save organics from themselves" while also bolstering their own numbers and strength. But I believe they've disregarded the "save organics" part and skipped straight to increasing their strength through harvest.

Well, and how exactly choosing to control Reapers is accepting their philosophy in that case?

By proxy I think, it's The Illusive Man's philosphy, an idea brought to him by the Reapers (in comparison with the indoctrinated Protheans who thought the same in their cycle). It can be seen as becoming a Reaper thrall liek the Illusive Man, while Synthesis can be seen as becoming one with the Reapers, "The final evolution of life" "The pinnacle of evolution".

Modifié par gunslinger_ruiz, 28 mai 2012 - 05:13 .

[Rifneno]

MACharlie1 wrote...

Line? I feel like I missed that part. 

It just seems odd: how can ANY civilization be knocked back to the stone age that space travel? You have literally thousands of geniuses who know how to take certain materials and make things out of them. It's not like the materials just go away or knowledge of how these things work goes away. Even if suddenly in our own society all of our technology stopped working, we'd still wouldn't be in a stone age. We have the materials and the smart people to get them working again. 

Yeah, I think it's hyperbole about knocking us back to the stone age.  But it would be a huge setback.  Here's the lines straight from the dialogue files:

Starbinger: I know you've thought about destroying us.
You can wipe out all synthetic life if you want.
Including the geth.
And most of the technology you rely on.
Even you are partly synthetic...

Shepard: But the Reapers will be destroyed?

Starbinger: Yes, but the peace won't last.
Soon, your children will create synthetics, and then the chaos will come back.

[spotlessvoid]

Destructorlio wrote...

spotlessvoid wrote...

@ destructorlio

interesting.

I actually hate the preservation of species idea.

What the heck are you even preserving? The gem of advanced organic life is sentience. You essentially destroy that which you claim to preserve.

Self determination is the natural right of all sentient life

I agree with you that destroying sentient life to preserve nonsentient life is morally indefensible, however the Inhibitors themselves are not sentient so they probably do not make any distinction. All they see is one small group of animals dominating, killing, eating and displacing every other life form. They note that the small group of animals is always sentient/using technology/going faster than light. They run the math and calculate that if the small group was removed, all of the other groups would flourish (we are a disease and they are the cure, as Agent Smith might say). They remove the small group. Rinse and repeat. We only say sentience is the gem of organic life because we ourselves are sentient. There's no artibrary standard by which this would be measured, outside of our own judgment.

So if they aren't sentient how was the value that animals are worth preserving assigned? Don't animals also kill indiscriminatly? Doesn't all life destroy other life, directly or indirectly?

However, my previous post was referring to the Reapers, my fault for not making that clear.

Conflict is always over resources, be it tangible good or power over the minds of men. All value systems are inherently flawed by limited perspective, as you pointed out. However, empathy is a demonstrable phenomenon in beings that have achieved self actualization. Beings that do not possess empathy but show intentionally destructive behavior, such as mass genocide, have not reached self actualization and are motivated by fulfilling whatever particular need drives them. Arguing that they are non sentient only displaces my point onto their creators.

In the case of the Reapers, if assuming that they are machines lacking free will, we know who that is.

[Destructorlio]

StElmo wrote...

This isn't an in-game clue, BUT.

Mass Effect 3 doesn't have a making of documentary, do you think this is because they were planning the indoctrination plot device and wanted to keep that kind of thing under wraps?

Instead, they put out thje final hours, which is more of a controlled, smaller tid bit?

Thoughts?

I definitely think their extreme silence on all things is a clue towards IT. Did they make docos for 1&2? 

Final hours app definitely not telling the whole story, and itself contains a lot of clues that support IT.

[DirtyPhoenix]

Wassup, anything new? I see Paxxton still thinks control is the best option. .. the indoctrination is strong on that one jk

[paxxton]

Rifneno wrote...

MACharlie1 wrote...

Line? I feel like I missed that part. 

It just seems odd: how can ANY civilization be knocked back to the stone age that space travel? You have literally thousands of geniuses who know how to take certain materials and make things out of them. It's not like the materials just go away or knowledge of how these things work goes away. Even if suddenly in our own society all of our technology stopped working, we'd still wouldn't be in a stone age. We have the materials and the smart people to get them working again. 

Yeah, I think it's hyperbole about knocking us back to the stone age.  But it would be a huge setback.  Here's the lines straight from the dialogue files:

Starbinger: I know you've thought about destroying us.
You can wipe out all synthetic life if you want.
Including the geth.
And most of the technology you rely on.
Even you are partly synthetic...

Shepard: But the Reapers will be destroyed?

Starbinger: Yes, but the peace won't last.
Soon, your children will create synthetics, and then the chaos will come back.

Doesn't Shepard answer "We'd take our chance."? So he doesn't care about all those people plugged into life-support or heavily augmented. For him they can just go dark?? Not very noble of him to do that. Those are serious consequences with which Shepard has to deal after Destroy.

Modifié par paxxton, 28 mai 2012 - 06:32 .

[Lord Goose]

But the script was changed...that doesn't
apply any more. To bring it up as an
arguement against anything is pointless.

The problem is, that they have already established the whole ''you evolve in the ways we set up for you'' in previous games, before changing the script.

[Lord Goose]

By proxy I think, it's The Illusive Man's
philosphy, an idea brought to him by the
Reapers (in comparison with the
indoctrinated Protheans who thought the
same in their cycle).

I think that this idea is his personal. You can compare it to that heretics believed in. Geth thought that Reapers are their gods, and the Reapers themselves were not amused, but since geth were useful they allowed them to harbour delusions. It is a case of argumentum and Hitlerum: even if the idea was shared by indoctrinated it doesn't have to be incorrect.
You may also pay attention that Reapers attacked Sanctuary because of Lawson's research. He may have uncovered something.

[Big Bad]

Lord Goose wrote...

By proxy I think, it's The Illusive Man's
philosphy, an idea brought to him by the
Reapers (in comparison with the
indoctrinated Protheans who thought the
same in their cycle).

I think that this idea is his personal. You can compare it to that heretics believed in. Geth thought that Reapers are their gods, and the Reapers themselves were not amused, but since geth were useful they allowed them to harbour delusions. It is a case of argumentum and Hitlerum: even if the idea was shared by indoctrinated it doesn't have to be incorrect.
You may also pay attention that Reapers attacked Sanctuary because of Lawson's research. He may have uncovered something.

Up until the last scene, the game goes out of its way to demonstrate that attempting to control the Reapers is a Very Bad Idea.  Then in walks the Catalyst who tells you, "Oh, control is actually a good choice - it will work for you, honest!"  He doesn't present any evidence or logical arguments to contradict what we've already learned from the story, but you're going to ignore all of this and trust him anyway?