55528 réponses à ce sujet

[byne]

Arian Dynas wrote...

Andromidius wrote...

Arian Dynas wrote...

Good is order. Good is synthesis, good is harmony and control and solidarity.

Reapers strike me as Lawful Evil.  They do evil to bring order to the galaxy.

Though quite why they keep setting organics up to be destroyed again and again really does beg the question - why?

Easiest answers are:

1/ They are insane.

2/ They really hate organics, and can't get enough of destroying them.

3/ They are procreating in the only way they know how, and organics are just 'material'.

4/ Some other unknown reason.

Regardless, they come under the 'Evil' category.  Without question.

Read my post above for MY take on the whole thing, the idea basically being that they do it out of a sort of sick and twisted philanthropy.

I still like my monkey on the stairs idea. You may or may not remember it.

[Arian Dynas]

byne wrote...

Arian Dynas wrote...

Andromidius wrote...

Arian Dynas wrote...

Good is order. Good is synthesis, good is harmony and control and solidarity.

Reapers strike me as Lawful Evil.  They do evil to bring order to the galaxy.

Though quite why they keep setting organics up to be destroyed again and again really does beg the question - why?

Easiest answers are:

1/ They are insane.

2/ They really hate organics, and can't get enough of destroying them.

3/ They are procreating in the only way they know how, and organics are just 'material'.

4/ Some other unknown reason.

Regardless, they come under the 'Evil' category.  Without question.

Read my post above for MY take on the whole thing, the idea basically being that they do it out of a sort of sick and twisted philanthropy.

I still like my monkey on the stairs idea. You may or may not remember it.

Vaguely, I'm trying very hard not to. 

[byne]

Arian Dynas wrote...

byne wrote...

Arian Dynas wrote...

Andromidius wrote...

Arian Dynas wrote...

Good is order. Good is synthesis, good is harmony and control and solidarity.

Reapers strike me as Lawful Evil.  They do evil to bring order to the galaxy.

Though quite why they keep setting organics up to be destroyed again and again really does beg the question - why?

Easiest answers are:

1/ They are insane.

2/ They really hate organics, and can't get enough of destroying them.

3/ They are procreating in the only way they know how, and organics are just 'material'.

4/ Some other unknown reason.

Regardless, they come under the 'Evil' category.  Without question.

Read my post above for MY take on the whole thing, the idea basically being that they do it out of a sort of sick and twisted philanthropy.

I still like my monkey on the stairs idea. You may or may not remember it.

Vaguely, I'm trying very hard not to. 

Well, I'll give a short summary for people who dont recall:

The Reapers Reap because thats the way its always been. They dont know why they have to Reap, they just know they have to.

It would explain why Sovereign and Harbinger seem to feel differently about why they do the cycles, but both agree that the cycles are needed.

[Arian Dynas]

A few thoughts I found lying in a browser tab that I think bore bringing forward.

Arian Dynas wrote...

CanadianGunshy wrote...

On my first playthrough - when I was presented by the choices, I couldn't decide what to do. Eventually the game ended with a critical mission failure saying "The crucible has been destroyed" and I had to start over again.

Synthesis imo was the worst of the choices, basically sacrificing all sentient life to become "tiny reaper-like beings". Control was very much alike the choice to rewrite the Geth in ME2. And Destroy was genocide, not only to the Reapers - but also to EDI and the Geth.

In ME2 I chose to destroy rather then rewrite. I considered it (ironically) to be the lesser of two evils. In ME3 I found if only the reapers were affected, I would have done the same. However EDI and the Geth were a part of that choice. For some reason I consider controlling the reapers the lesser of two evils then sacrificing a allies that trusted me to do the "right" thing. Thus I was paralyzed with indecision at the final moments of the game.

What I don't follow is how Control = Indoctrination.

If Shepard is choosing it not to control the Reapers, but to save lives (synthetic as they may be) instead. He is essentially rejecting the starchild's (as well as the reapers) reasons.

Maybe someone can clear this up?

Because so far the only reasons I've heard that control is indoctrination is because TIM wanted it and his eyes are blue when he is being evaporated by a blue beam.

You can think of it this way;

Saren wanted Synthesis, he believed he could form a pact between machines and organics, the strengths of both, the weaknesses of neither, all organics everywhere would be improved and saved by him, "I will save more lives than have ever existed." Sound familiar?

Control was The Illusive Man's own philosophy, he possessed the arrogance to believe he could control a being with a mind beyond anything he would even be capable of comprehending, something so vast as to give even the Geth Consensus a feeling of awe being touched by it.

Synthesis appeals to Shepard's heroism, he falls for the same trap Saren did, trying to be the hero, trying to save everyone, and in the end saving no one, becase he chose to do so by way of the Reaper philosophy. Because that is precisely what it is, accepting that the Reapers are a necessity and that things must be done their way,

Control and Destroy on the other hand are more opposed to one another.

Control is giving in. Control is what trapped The Illusive Man, he belived he could Control his controllers. "You will lose everything you have." The Guardian explicitly tells Shepard this, he will lose everything if he choses Control, he even has it pointed out to him that by choosing Control, he is surrendering his body, to whom or what, the Guardian has no words to say. Control is accepting the idea that the Reapers exist, and that allowing them to continue to exist would benefit you, Shepard is betraying his principles in the name of power, just as The Illusive Man did.

Destroy is standing by a diamond hard core of mental anathema. At the Crucible choice, you aren't summoned there to create anything or Control anyone. You are summoned there to reject the Reapers, to push them out of the gates of your mind. Destroy is the choice that has to be made, even with consequences, because Shepard himself knows that this is a war, and that means that not necessarily everyone will survive. "Victory through Sacrifice" is one of the themes.

Arian Dynas wrote...

HellishFiend wrote...

Starbuck8 wrote...


I kinda like what someone said earlier, that yes, Shepard has become a legend blah blah, but that doesn't mean the last thing we just saw Shep do caused him to defeat the reapers. Couple that with "one more story" and that implies there is more to come (DLC, more to the ending... speculation). Still most people dismiss it as an ad from EA to buy DLC lol.

I disagree with that interpretation. We've been promised a "Reapers win" ending, remember? There will be situations where people who get that message go on to eventually lose to the Reapers rather than defeating them. 

A legend doesn't have to live or succeed.

"Shepard has become a legend by ending the Reaper threat"

"Shepard has gone down in history as the first man to defeat the Reaper threat to his mind" see the ways you can interpret that? They never specify what threat, threatening to what, or indeed anything other than that it's a threat and has to do with the Reapers.

 

[Dwailing]

Arian Dynas wrote...

A few thoughts I found lying in a browser tab that I think bore bringing forward.

Arian Dynas wrote...

*mega snip*

Control is giving in. Control is what trapped The Illusive Man, he belived he could Control his controllers. "You will lose everything you have." The Guardian explicitly tells Shepard this, he will lose everything if he choses Control, he even has it pointed out to him that by choosing Control, he is surrendering his body, to whom or what, the Guardian has no words to say. Control is accepting the idea that the Reapers exist, and that allowing them to continue to exist would benefit you, Shepard is betraying his principles in the name of power, just as The Illusive Man did.

*see above snip*

You know, that reminds me of a line from Legion when you ask him what it was like to be attached to a Reaper consciousness.  Remember how even IT says that it found it impossible to fully comprehend the magnitude of what it was experiencing?  This is a Geth, a creature that WANTS to be as connected to as many other minds as it can to boost its own comprehension of the universe and is used to experiencing the voices of millions if not billions, and even it was unable to fully comprehend ONE Reaper's consciousness.  And Shepard thought that he could control them ALL!?  No, no organic mind could COMPREHEND let alone influence the Reapers. 

[Salient Archer]

TJBartlemus wrote...

HellishFiend wrote...

Salient Archer wrote...


Just going to drop this here: http://social.biowar...3/2141#11952209 I don't ask for you to agree with it, but just read it with an open mind .. and yes, it is very, very longwinded.

Just for the record, I want you to know that I do agree with the vast majority of your EMS theory. It was just one particular point I disagreed on, and I cant even remember what it was, so it must not have been very important.

Yeah I agree with your theory. Seems quite explained and thought out. How long did it take you to write that and get all the details right? Very well done.:happy:

The thought process was more of a vent to process what I initially had seen in the final scenes of the game. I honestly felt depressed after finishing it, and although I played as a mostly Paragon Shep I chose destroy on instinct alone, it was out of character but yet felt right and honest. I wanted to explore the part of my psyche that led me to that decision. So I then took the time to collect my thoughts, explored the extended lore and that eventually lead to that EMS system.

[Salient Archer]

HellishFiend wrote...

Salient Archer wrote...


Just going to drop this here: http://social.biowar...3/2141#11952209 I don't ask for you to agree with it, but just read it with an open mind .. and yes, it is very, very longwinded.

Just for the record, I want you to know that I do agree with the vast majority of your EMS theory. It was just one particular point I disagreed on, and I cant even remember what it was, so it must not have been very important.

That’s cool and I honestly think you and [mostly] everyone on this forum are brilliant people. I think you disagreed on the Shepard’s resolve part about the collector base. Anyway at the end of the day I'm just happy that we have a productive community on this forum that's intelligent and civil enough that we're happy to have divergent ideas but can still feel safe to freely express them.

[HellishFiend]

Salient Archer wrote...
That’s cool and I honestly think you and [mostly] everyone on this forum are brilliant people. I think you disagreed on the Shepard’s resolve part about the collector base. Anyway at the end of the day I'm just happy that we have a productive community on this forum that's intelligent and civil enough that we're happy to have divergent ideas but can still feel safe to freely express them.

Same here! Glad to have you back. 

[Arian Dynas]

HellishFiend wrote...

Salient Archer wrote...
That’s cool and I honestly think you and [mostly] everyone on this forum are brilliant people. I think you disagreed on the Shepard’s resolve part about the collector base. Anyway at the end of the day I'm just happy that we have a productive community on this forum that's intelligent and civil enough that we're happy to have divergent ideas but can still feel safe to freely express them.

Same here! Glad to have you back. 

Seconded. *brofist* 

[HellishFiend]

Dwailing wrote...

You know, that reminds me of a line from Legion when you ask him what it was like to be attached to a Reaper consciousness.  Remember how even IT says that it found it impossible to fully comprehend the magnitude of what it was experiencing?  This is a Geth, a creature that WANTS to be as connected to as many other minds as it can to boost its own comprehension of the universe and is used to experiencing the voices of millions if not billions, and even it was unable to fully comprehend ONE Reaper's consciousness.  And Shepard thought that he could control them ALL!?  No, no organic mind could COMPREHEND let alone influence the Reapers. 

I think the word he used was that the connection was "unproductive". I'm not sure that carries all of the implications you drew from it, but some of them perhaps. It definitely does imply that for some reason, Legion could not extract anything useful from having that connection to the Reaper consciousness. But, it may not stand to reason that Legion was even in the position to have enough access to have the opportunitiy to be "productive" with his connection. 

That being said, I still hope you are right that in the end, we can not fully comprehend the way a Reaper truly operates. Though its possible that us finding them so intimidating is simply a form of propaganda and/or indoctrination. 

[Dwailing]

Salient Archer wrote...

TJBartlemus wrote...

HellishFiend wrote...

Salient Archer wrote...


Just going to drop this here: http://social.biowar...3/2141#11952209 I don't ask for you to agree with it, but just read it with an open mind .. and yes, it is very, very longwinded.

Just for the record, I want you to know that I do agree with the vast majority of your EMS theory. It was just one particular point I disagreed on, and I cant even remember what it was, so it must not have been very important.

Yeah I agree with your theory. Seems quite explained and thought out. How long did it take you to write that and get all the details right? Very well done.:happy:

The thought process was more of a vent to process what I initially had seen in the final scenes of the game. I honestly felt depressed after finishing it, and although I played as a mostly Paragon Shep I chose destroy on instinct alone, it was out of character but yet felt right and honest. I wanted to explore the part of my psyche that led me to that decision. So I then took the time to collect my thoughts, explored the extended lore and that eventually lead to that EMS system.

You know, I had my own theory about the EMS system a few dozen pages ago.  In addition to the idea that it represents Shepard's will power, I postulated that it could represent, in a slightly crazy sort of way, the degree to which the PLAYER is concerned with what happens.  If you have a low EMS, it means you didn't complete many side missions, and you didn't play much if any multiplayer.  Therefore, it can be safely assumed that you aren't as concerned about the outcome of the war and the game.  So, they give you one or, at most, two possible endings, and that's that.  If you play singleplayer but no multiplayer, you're more dedicated, and so, they give you synthesis, and a better version of control and destroy.  They assume you're more concerned with the outcome, so they give you better possible endings.  And finally, if you play multiplayer in addition to singleplayer, you can end up getting the breath scene after destroy.  You REALLY care about this universe, and you want some hope for the future, so that's what they give you.  Now, I know this sounds crazy, and it quite possibly (Probably? lol) is, but I figure it's speculation worthy.  Also, I know this maybe dips into literalist territory, but I do believe it could be tweaked slightly to fit IT.

Edit: I just had an addition.  The extra endings that come with a higher EMS might ALSO be an attempt to placate the players by giving them extra hope for the future, culminating in the breath scene.

Modifié par Dwailing, 09 juin 2012 - 03:24 .

[HellishFiend]

Dwailing wrote...

You know, I had my own theory about the EMS system a few dozen pages ago.  In addition to the idea that it represents Shepard's will power, I postulated that it could represent, in a slightly crazy sort of way, the degree to which the PLAYER is concerned with what happens.  If you have a low EMS, it means you didn't complete many side missions, and you didn't play much if any multiplayer.  Therefore, it can be safely assumed that you aren't as concerned about the outcome of the war and the game.  So, they give you one or, at most, two possible endings, and that's that.  If you play singleplayer but no multiplayer, you're more dedicated, and so, they give you synthesis, and a better version of control and destroy.  They assume you're more concerned with the outcome, so they give you better possible endings.  And finally, if you play multiplayer in addition to singleplayer, you can end up getting the breath scene after destroy.  You REALLY care about this universe, and you want some hope for the future, so that's what they give you.  Now, I know this sounds crazy, and it quite possibly (Probably? lol) is, but I figure it's speculation worthy.  Also, I know this maybe dips into literalist territory, but I do believe it could be tweaked slightly to fit IT.

It's plausible that some form or part of that could be true. In any case, at the end of the day, I'm inclined to believe that the War Assets themselves can be taken literally (names, descriptions, etc), however the EMS/TMS numbers themselves, and perhaps even galactic readiness, have a different significance of which we're not yet aware. 

The question is, what kind of significance? 

[Dwailing]

HellishFiend wrote...

Dwailing wrote...

You know, that reminds me of a line from Legion when you ask him what it was like to be attached to a Reaper consciousness.  Remember how even IT says that it found it impossible to fully comprehend the magnitude of what it was experiencing?  This is a Geth, a creature that WANTS to be as connected to as many other minds as it can to boost its own comprehension of the universe and is used to experiencing the voices of millions if not billions, and even it was unable to fully comprehend ONE Reaper's consciousness.  And Shepard thought that he could control them ALL!?  No, no organic mind could COMPREHEND let alone influence the Reapers. 

I think the word he used was that the connection was "unproductive". I'm not sure that carries all of the implications you drew from it, but some of them perhaps. It definitely does imply that for some reason, Legion could not extract anything useful from having that connection to the Reaper consciousness. But, it may not stand to reason that Legion was even in the position to have enough access to have the opportunitiy to be "productive" with his connection. 

That being said, I still hope you are right that in the end, we can not fully comprehend the way a Reaper truly operates. Though its possible that us finding them so intimidating is simply a form of propaganda and/or indoctrination. 

Take a look at this video at around the 8:50 mark.  I do believe that Legion says he couldn't comprehend the Reaper mind.

[Arian Dynas]

HellishFiend wrote...

Dwailing wrote...

You know, I had my own theory about the EMS system a few dozen pages ago.  In addition to the idea that it represents Shepard's will power, I postulated that it could represent, in a slightly crazy sort of way, the degree to which the PLAYER is concerned with what happens.  If you have a low EMS, it means you didn't complete many side missions, and you didn't play much if any multiplayer.  Therefore, it can be safely assumed that you aren't as concerned about the outcome of the war and the game.  So, they give you one or, at most, two possible endings, and that's that.  If you play singleplayer but no multiplayer, you're more dedicated, and so, they give you synthesis, and a better version of control and destroy.  They assume you're more concerned with the outcome, so they give you better possible endings.  And finally, if you play multiplayer in addition to singleplayer, you can end up getting the breath scene after destroy.  You REALLY care about this universe, and you want some hope for the future, so that's what they give you.  Now, I know this sounds crazy, and it quite possibly (Probably? lol) is, but I figure it's speculation worthy.  Also, I know this maybe dips into literalist territory, but I do believe it could be tweaked slightly to fit IT.

It's plausible that some form or part of that could be true. In any case, at the end of the day, I'm inclined to believe that the War Assets themselves can be taken literally (names, descriptions, etc), however the EMS/TMS numbers themselves, and perhaps even galactic readiness, have a different significance of which we're not yet aware. 

The question is, what kind of significance? 

Could explain why Conrad Verner is worth 1-5 EMS, Shepard doesn't imagine him to be paticularly important. 

[Dwailing]

HellishFiend wrote...

Dwailing wrote...

You know, I had my own theory about the EMS system a few dozen pages ago.  In addition to the idea that it represents Shepard's will power, I postulated that it could represent, in a slightly crazy sort of way, the degree to which the PLAYER is concerned with what happens.  If you have a low EMS, it means you didn't complete many side missions, and you didn't play much if any multiplayer.  Therefore, it can be safely assumed that you aren't as concerned about the outcome of the war and the game.  So, they give you one or, at most, two possible endings, and that's that.  If you play singleplayer but no multiplayer, you're more dedicated, and so, they give you synthesis, and a better version of control and destroy.  They assume you're more concerned with the outcome, so they give you better possible endings.  And finally, if you play multiplayer in addition to singleplayer, you can end up getting the breath scene after destroy.  You REALLY care about this universe, and you want some hope for the future, so that's what they give you.  Now, I know this sounds crazy, and it quite possibly (Probably? lol) is, but I figure it's speculation worthy.  Also, I know this maybe dips into literalist territory, but I do believe it could be tweaked slightly to fit IT.

It's plausible that some form or part of that could be true. In any case, at the end of the day, I'm inclined to believe that the War Assets themselves can be taken literally (names, descriptions, etc), however the EMS/TMS numbers themselves, and perhaps even galactic readiness, have a different significance of which we're not yet aware. 

The question is, what kind of significance? 

Yeah, that's my thought.  And until Bioware tells us exactly what they mean, all we're going to have are speculations.  Curse you Casey Hudson and Mac Walters!!!!

[Big Bad]

Andromidius wrote...

Big Bad wrote...

I'mma go play some PC MP. If anybody wants to join me, my username is someotherguy86

Off topic, but how do you join games with other people anyway?  The system seems...well, counter-intuitive.

Edit: Should say, how do I party up with people?

It is kinda counter-intuitive.  First you have to friend somebody, and then you have to create a match and select the "invite friends" button.  I think that brings up a dialog box between you and your friend...and I can't remember what happens next because I've only done it once!

[HellishFiend]

Dwailing wrote...

Take a look at this video at around the 8:50 mark.  I do believe that Legion says he couldn't comprehend the Reaper mind.

Wow, that is totally different from what Geth VI says. I assumed they were the same. The "unproductive" line was from Geth VI. Legions line seems so much more...emotional. 

RIP Legion in my playthrough...

But yeah, even considering the more profound statements that Legion offers compared to "We are not Legion", I think it still stands to reason that a Reaper would be capable of controlling what parts of its mind it does or doesnt show to Legion. Think of a super intelligent adult interacting with a child. Small children are essentially vulnerable and helpless to the thoughts and actions of adults, and the adult shows the child what he or she wants them to see. The child perceives that as it's reality. I visualize a similar connection between Legion and the Reaper.

Modifié par HellishFiend, 09 juin 2012 - 03:32 .

[Electra77]

The anti-EDI argument seems like it is only sentimental attachment Being symbolic or part of a narrative is not mutually exclusive with betrayal. The betrayal that you don't expect cuts the deepest and ultimately is the best.

Back to my original Bobby Ewing analogy, indoctrination is not satisfying. Assuming you did things right, you wake up still on Earth. You could not have magically gotten to the Citadel in this hallucination and actually destroyed the reapers. So, whatever the outcome, the reapers win. And ultimately whatever you did to get here was pointless. So, why have bothered to begin with? Harbinger and Sovereign were right.

[Dwailing]

HellishFiend wrote...

Dwailing wrote...

Take a look at this video at around the 8:50 mark.  I do believe that Legion says he couldn't comprehend the Reaper mind.

Wow, that is totally different from what Geth VI says. I assumed they were the same. The "unproductive" line was from Geth VI. Legions line seems so much more...emotional. 

RIP Legion in my playthrough...

But yeah, even considering the more profound statements that Legion offers compared to "We are not Legion", I think it still stands to reason that a Reaper would be capable of controlling what parts of its mind it does or doesnt show to Legion. Think of a super intelligent adult interacting with a child. Small children are essentially vulnerable and helpless to the thoughts and actions of adults, and the adult shows the child what he or she wants them to see. The child perceives that as it's reality. I visualize a similar connection between Legion and the Reaper.

Yeah, I agree that that probably could fit the interaction between Legion and the Reaper, but it seems like a nice hint for anyone with Legion that the odds of being able to control the Reapers are slim to none.

[HellishFiend]

Dwailing wrote...

Yeah, I agree that that probably could fit the interaction between Legion and the Reaper, but it seems like a nice hint for anyone with Legion that the odds of being able to control the Reapers are slim to none.

Yes. While that alone may not enough for players to draw that conclusion, when you add it on top of everything else.... It becomes even more obvious than it should already be. 

[Turbo_J]

I got sick of waiting and fixed my computer. 80MM fan attached to video card, some arctic silver for good measure... max load temp of 81C and it seems to work just fine. Lot quieter than the stock fan too.

So what I miss?

Oh, and on 'Reaper Tech' and EDI and the Geth...

EDI: was created using Reaper CODE - likely sanitized if not completely rewritten using Reaper code as a basis.

Geth: Upgraded using Reaper CODE - likely sanitized

Code is number and letters in programming language. It is not a physical substance. It is not Reaper 'TECH'

The way I see it , any unmodified Reaper hardware could pose a problem. Reaper TECH is the danger, not the program languages derived from Reaper code itself... as long as it's 'scrubbed' of course.

Think about the Geth dreadnaught and what Tali says about the Geth being integrated into the ship. Some Reaper tech may have independent, unintelligent programs that contribute to Indoctrination, including but not limited to infrasonic and ultrasonic noise production. Look at all the circuitry embedded into the skeleton of the Proto Reaper on Cronos.

The IFF had a virus embedded into it, but it was not an Indoctrination device. Reaper artifacts like Roe were deliberately designed to Indoctrinate. Even the derelict Reaper still had the capacity to indoctrinate. I think it's an element built into the structure of the Reaper, but it can be disabled, as it's just software and circuitry hidden in the hardware.

Now, how clean is the TECH in Sheps body? That's a question I'd like answered.

Derived = OK.
Re-purposed, maybe ok if you are lucky.
Acquired and used as is = Indoctrination fodder.

[Dwailing]

Electra77 wrote...

The anti-EDI argument seems like it is only sentimental attachment Being symbolic or part of a narrative is not mutually exclusive with betrayal. The betrayal that you don't expect cuts the deepest and ultimately is the best.

Back to my original Bobby Ewing analogy, indoctrination is not satisfying. Assuming you did things right, you wake up still on Earth. You could not have magically gotten to the Citadel in this hallucination and actually destroyed the reapers. So, whatever the outcome, the reapers win. And ultimately whatever you did to get here was pointless. So, why have bothered to begin with? Harbinger and Sovereign were right.

No, it wasn't pointless.  You just essentially gave the Reapers the galaxy's biggest middle finger, and you just showed them that Shepard is more than just another organic for them to push around.  You've done something that NO organic that we know of has EVER done.  And I don't know if the Reapers understand fear, but you can be **** sure that I'm going to give them every opportunity and reason to do so.  

Edit: Also, does anyone else wish that Shep could give the Reapers a speech like the one that Cole Train gives the Locust in Gears of War 2?  'Cause that would be awesome.  (Here's the speech if you've never played Gears of War 2 or just don't remember.)

Modifié par Dwailing, 09 juin 2012 - 03:50 .

[dreamgazer]

Turbo_J wrote...

Now, how clean is the TECH in Sheps body? That's a question I'd like answered.

If Shep's breathing in a literal interpretation of the destroy ending, then not enough to kill him. 

Enough to facilitate indoctrination?  I don't think so.  Wouldn't s/he have already been swayed by this point if that were the case, due to direct contact?

[HellishFiend]

Electra77 wrote...

The anti-EDI argument seems like it is only sentimental attachment Being symbolic or part of a narrative is not mutually exclusive with betrayal. The betrayal that you don't expect cuts the deepest and ultimately is the best.

Difference of opinion I suppose. I dont know if I'd say that character bias is any part of it, but I can say that from a literary standpoint, I feel that EDI's overall effect (symbolic or otherwise) on the plot and narrative is too vital to throw away.

That draws parallels with the Reapers actually being revealed as the good guys, killing Organics for their own good. Narrative wise, it's just an extreme version of that same concept. A key element of the plot is rewritten at the last moment and suddenly that entire aspect of the plot is different. 

That's just my take on it anyway. 

Please do keep offering your opinion, even if it differs. The more the better!

[Arashi08]

Turbo_J wrote...

I got sick of waiting and fixed my computer. 80MM fan attached to video card, some arctic silver for good measure... max load temp of 81C and it seems to work just fine. Lot quieter than the stock fan too.

So what I miss?

Oh, and on 'Reaper Tech' and EDI and the Geth...

EDI: was created using Reaper CODE - likely sanitized if not completely rewritten using Reaper code as a basis.

Geth: Upgraded using Reaper CODE - likely sanitized

Code is number and letters in programming language. It is not a physical substance. It is not Reaper 'TECH'

The way I see it , any unmodified Reaper hardware could pose a problem. Reaper TECH is the danger, not the program languages derived from Reaper code itself... as long as it's 'scrubbed' of course.

Think about the Geth dreadnaught and what Tali says about the Geth being integrated into the ship. Some Reaper tech may have independent, unintelligent programs that contribute to Indoctrination, including but not limited to infrasonic and ultrasonic noise production. Look at all the circuitry embedded into the skeleton of the Proto Reaper on Cronos.

The IFF had a virus embedded into it, but it was not an Indoctrination device. Reaper artifacts like Roe were deliberately designed to Indoctrinate. Even the derelict Reaper still had the capacity to indoctrinate. I think it's an element built into the structure of the Reaper, but it can be disabled, as it's just software and circuitry hidden in the hardware.

Now, how clean is the TECH in Sheps body? That's a question I'd like answered.

Derived = OK.
Re-purposed, maybe ok if you are lucky.
Acquired and used as is = Indoctrination fodder.

I'm fairly certain Shepard does NOT have Reaper tech in her.  In fact im pretty sure that the whole reason Cerberus brought Shepard back was to ACQUIRE said tech from the Collectors (clearly it wasn't just about saving human colonies, since they were working with the Collectors while they were doing this.)  Now it is true that they did aquire wreckage from Sovereign, but that was likely used almost exclusively to create EDI, given their experiments seem to accelerate after Grayson was implanted. 

According to Retribution, Grayson was the first Cerberus subject implanted with reaper tech, which took place AFTER the events of ME2.  So it doesn't seem very likely that Shepard could have possibly been given Reaper tech, since Grayson was the basis for Cerberus' implantation of their own troops.

EDIT: for additional information

Modifié par Arashi08, 09 juin 2012 - 03:52 .