9089 réponses à ce sujet

[Ieldra]

Steelcan wrote...

Ieldra2 wrote...

Steelcan wrote...

I doubt the "minds" in a reaper have any influence on the reaper itself

The uploaded minds, conjoined, constitute the mind of the Reaper. That's what we get from Legion's ultra-rare dialogue in ME2. A Reaper *is* that, it doesn't just carry it. That's why a Reaper can be said to be an "ascended" form of a species, though one of a particularly unpleasant origin. The Catalyst simply subverted the will of the Reapers. 

. So why do Reapers have one personality?  Harbinger, Sovereign, that Reaper on Rannoch, they all had one personality.  Sovereign said "I am Sovereign" not "We are Sovereign"

Its also possible Legion is wrong about the nature of a reaper's mind.

Because the minds are conjoined? It's not too far-fetched to see how minds can exist on their own and still contribute to an emergent whole. In fact, it's not all that uncommon in SF. I've known such things in SF for...hmm....40 years, and I know they existed for at least another ten. 

As for Legion, he's the most believable source. Just listen to that dialogue if you can get it. It makes way more sense than anything else we get to hear, *and* it complements what the Catalyst tells us. Even EDI's cut dialogue from the SM says the same. Everything else is just a smokescreen Bioware set up to accommodate those players who'd hate to see the Reapers as anything but evil monsters, or to keep the mystery intact. Not that it wasn't completely obvious at that point what the Reapers had to be. EDI's "speculation" at the CB never made any sense.

[Steelcan]

Ieldra2 wrote...
Because the minds are conjoined? It's not too far-fetched to see how minds can exist on their own and still contribute to an emergent whole. In fact, it's not all that uncommon in SF. I've known such things in SF for...hmm....40 years, and I know they existed for at least another ten. 

As for Legion, he's the most believable source. Just listen to that dialogue if you can get it. It makes way more sense than anything else we get to hear, *and* it complements what the Catalyst tells us. Even EDI's cut dialogue from the SM says the same. Everything else is just a smokescreen Bioware set up to accommodate those players who'd hate to see the Reapers as anything but evil monsters, or to keep the mystery intact. Not that it wasn't completely obvious at that point what the Reapers had to be. EDI's "speculation" at the CB never made any sense.

. The minds are conjoined, but there is still one distinct personality?  If you had thousands of minds, each fully functioning, and contributing all you would get is a shouting contest for each person to try and be heard over every one else....... Mostly kidding.  But I still don't see how that is possible.  And since it is not explained horribly well, even by legion..

And why would Legion know?  He has never interfaced with a reapers, only the heretics have.

I don't think I've heard EDI's dialogue, what does she say?

[Ieldra]

Here's the unused Reaper reveal from ME2:



The relevant parts you'll find at 1.07m. You'll find the whole collection of unused audio from ME2's SM in this thread.

Modifié par Ieldra2, 08 février 2013 - 08:59 .

[Wayning_Star]

If Shep chooses, the MEU chooses. It doesn't matter in the least about 'personal' choice. There isn't one, nature has made sure of it.

Even astute Ieldra2 misses the mark when postulating a postition on Synthesis. Understandable,as it's never explained. The base of it is this. Synthesis changes you not the other way around, no matter how you slice it, Nature it's self is altered to admit technological intelligence to share the wealth of Nature it's self. No organic can state they came first anymore, within that new structure.

Nature, with it's apparent cycle of evolution, has created the mess and it's Nature it's self that what's got to change to correct it. Otherwise organics must learn to deal with nature without the aid synthetic intelligent life.

Leviathan, Humans and all the other assorted organic life forms fall victim to that premise. The MEU it's self is based on it, that current state of nature and it's requirments for evolution.

Ascention is what the reaperships assigned to harvest and their construction,not synthesis, ever. They merely point out that they're ascended from matter, as it stated as organic and synthetic to acheive that goal. That's why they seem so stupid, probably because they're designed that way, to obey. They take NO pride in existence, they merely ARE, and intend to make more of themselves, as that is the solution that doesn't work anymore.

Complication of an issue doesn't mean you've accomplished understanding of that issue.

[Ieldra]

Wayning_Star wrote...
Even astute Ieldra2 misses the mark when postulating a postition on Synthesis. Understandable,as it's never explained. The base of it is this. Synthesis changes you not the other way around, no matter how you slice it, Nature it's self is altered to admit technological intelligence to share the wealth of Nature it's self. No organic can state they came first anymore, within that new structure.

Nature, with it's apparent cycle of evolution, has created the mess and it's Nature it's self that what's got to change to correct it. Otherwise organics must learn to deal with nature without the aid synthetic intelligent life.

You don't seriously expect me to accept a pseudomystical explanation like that, do you? First, "Nature" isn't an entity, it doesn't do things. Things just happen according to certain laws. Also, there exists non-living matter. Second, the idea that "nature" is opposed to "artifice" (technology) is a Romantic conceit and simply false. Historically, they have been *aesthetic* opposites, but that's meaningless anywhere outside of art and doesn't carry over into physics. For that reason, technological intelligence does not exist separate from nature and doesn't need to be integrated into it. It already is, like everything else that exists.

Synthesis is a change in, or of, the chemical building blocks used by organic life, plus, apparently, a rewriting of specific types of information processing in the brains of synthetics. Apart from that, it may add things to the bodies of organics which are then integrated as "natural" parts of their bodies. Whatever it is, and as "space-magical" as the process that enacts the change comes across, in the end it's science and technology, not mysticism. We are attempting to describe Synthesis in terms of science and technology. Describing it using mystical concepts is no help at all.

Complication of an issue doesn't mean you've accomplished understanding of that issue.

Yeah, things can appear so simple when you take metaphors for reality. Next you'll come up with biosynthetic DNA like Mac Walters... Give me an elegant and simple explanation in meaningful scientific and technological terms which I haven't already come up with, and I'll concede the point.

Modifié par Ieldra2, 08 février 2013 - 10:43 .

[ruggly]

Either I need to start drinking less, or wayning needs to ramble less.
edit: I a word

Modifié par ruggly, 08 février 2013 - 11:02 .

[Wayning_Star]

Ieldra2 wrote...

Wayning_Star wrote...
Even astute Ieldra2 misses the mark when postulating a postition on Synthesis. Understandable,as it's never explained. The base of it is this. Synthesis changes you not the other way around, no matter how you slice it, Nature it's self is altered to admit technological intelligence to share the wealth of Nature it's self. No organic can state they came first anymore, within that new structure.

Nature, with it's apparent cycle of evolution, has created the mess and it's Nature it's self that what's got to change to correct it. Otherwise organics must learn to deal with nature without the aid synthetic intelligent life.

You don't seriously expect me to accept a pseudomystical explanation like that, do you? First, "Nature" isn't an entity, it doesn't do things. Things just happen according to certain laws. Also, there exists non-living matter. Second, the idea that "nature" is opposed to "artifice" (technology) is a Romantic conceit and simply false. Historically, they have been *aesthetic* opposites, but that's meaningless anywhere outside of art and doesn't carry over into physics. For that reason, technological intelligence does not exist separate from nature and doesn't need to be integrated into it. It already is, like everything else that exists.

Synthesis is a change in, or of, the chemical building blocks used by organic life, plus, apparently, a rewriting of specific types of information processing in the brains of synthetics. Apart from that, it may add things to the bodies of organics which are then integrated as "natural" parts of their bodies. Whatever it is, and as "space-magical" as the process that enacts the change comes across, in the end it's science and technology, not mysticism. We are attempting to describe Synthesis in terms of science and technology. Describing it using mystical concepts is no help at all.

Complication of an issue doesn't mean you've accomplished understanding of that issue.

Yeah, things can appear so simple when you take metaphors for reality. Next you'll come up with biosynthetic DNA like Mac Walters... Give me an elegant and simple explanation in meaningful scientific and technological terms which I haven't already come up with, and I'll concede the point.

of course nature isn't an 'entity', in the sense of being, it is however the root of learning, as adaption is necessary for survival,and apparently evolution.

The science isn't possible unless you're privy to the pretence of it's existence, we are not, only the results are only alluded to. There isn't any peer review of hard data on it, nor peers to consider, other than the catalyst and the engineers of the crucible. They're not talking about it, informing Shepard of any science, only the catalyst alludes to the results, before choices are made. Those choices are left by unknown quantity as well. Shep is left with a best guess scenerio at best, trusting in the logic of the catalyst and it's representation of Synthesis.

IN the end, all choices are dependent on the Catalyst, and trust in the choices menu authors, as being true to the needs of the MEU. Doesn't matter what choice is made, they're all experimental, without technical explanation in any form.

The idea is not to understand the choices so much as to understan which is best for the MEU at large.  You needn't concede anything, your intentions are quite honorable, if not exaggerated in and attempt to explain a total unknown. Parible and anology is all that is there to go on. Apples and oranges, I'm afraid.

IF all indications of the synthesis choice is true to its description, then it's the most potent and effective choice to complete Sheps mission, and end the reaper threat, stop the chaos for a time, at least deminish it as well as chaos, it's the best Shep can do for any longer term 'solution' to the catalyst and the Leviathan quandry.

[clennon8]

Blurg.

[Obadiah]

@Wayning_Star
I don't think lack of complete information on Synthesis precludes a discussion on the feasibility of possible implementations.

[Nimrodell]

Ieldra, you forgot (me too, just remembered) the simplest thing from both ME1 and ME3, that can help explaining why people should not be fast to judge anything new and 'unknown'... biotics. We have several biotic 'terrorist' crisis in ME1, showing that people with biotics are treated with prejudice and are 'spurned' by 'normal' human society. In ME3 both Joker and Kaidan (though Joker has better lines about it after saving students from the Grissom Academy - it's not a disability but the majority actually sees biotics like that, still). The same will be stated by Nyreen in Omega DLC when it comes to her and her biotics showing... meaning even turians as an alien race that was space worthy much earlier than humans, still suffer from prejudices and fear from something that is new.. and the same goes for players and synthesis. Biotics development was not something 'natural' according to majority and they actually got bad treatmeant - no matter the fact they can actually contribute more... and you can see the same mechanic when it comes to synthesis and players.

[mvaning]

Wayning_Star wrote...

IF all indications of the synthesis choice is true to its description, then it's the most potent and effective choice to complete Sheps mission, and end the reaper threat, stop the chaos for a time, at least deminish it as well as chaos, it's the best Shep can do for any longer term 'solution' to the catalyst and the Leviathan quandry.

Shepard's mission is not to stop chaos however. His goal is to stop the reapers. In that regard, the destroy option is the best choice. Evolution is not a concept to be viewed as a nature's way of making oneself better. That's not how it works. Evolution IS adaptation for survival. (All basic science, just read Darwin's theory in high school biology books. )

The catalyst views life as chaotic because he is not an organic, he cannot understand the natural order of things. The same way that EDI has to be nurtured into understanding human emotions and morality. The catalyst views Synthesis as the apex of evolution because he does not understand that life is dictated by a natural order that is not governed by anything that is understandable.

His option is to force evolution to stop the chaos. This is the wrong choice because what he thinks of as evolution and how the crucible works can not equal what the actual apex of evolution is.

This is an analogue to the Heisenberg uncertainty principle. You can never know the exact position of an electron because the act of determining its position changes its position. In the same way, you can never know what the apex of evolution is because any attempt to determine it or to force it will change the variables and whatever that apex is will change.

With this in mind, it can be seen that any and all of his solutions will not stop the chaos. His solutions are all futile. In the same regard, his goal is to stop the chaos using the reapers. While Synthesis might stop the chaos for a short time, the forcing of it will change the variables. There is nothing to say that chaos will eventually start again and the reapers will again become a threat.

The best solution is to allow the chaos to happen. Evolution is not a peaceful or orderly occurrence. It happens through destruction, violence and the fight for survival. To try to control these things is inevitably futile. Therefor, the most effective option is to destroy the reapers and allow universe to take its course.

[Ieldra]

Nimrodell wrote...
Ieldra, you forgot (me too, just remembered) the simplest thing from both ME1 and ME3, that can help explaining why people should not be fast to judge anything new and 'unknown'... biotics. We have several biotic 'terrorist' crisis in ME1, showing that people with biotics are treated with prejudice and are 'spurned' by 'normal' human society. In ME3 both Joker and Kaidan (though Joker has better lines about it after saving students from the Grissom Academy - it's not a disability but the majority actually sees biotics like that, still). The same will be stated by Nyreen in Omega DLC when it comes to her and her biotics showing... meaning even turians as an alien race that was space worthy much earlier than humans, still suffer from prejudices and fear from something that is new.. and the same goes for players and synthesis. Biotics development was not something 'natural' according to majority and they actually got bad treatmeant - no matter the fact they can actually contribute more... and you can see the same mechanic when it comes to synthesis and players.

Indeed I forgot. I've frequently mentioned my hypothesis that the "sacred nature" intuition is the main reason for the reaction of many players to Synthesis, but I didn't think of looking for an example in the ME universe, possibly because the prejudice against biotics isn't very visible in the games, which the Codex explains by saying the military is more accepting. Nice.

[Ieldra]

Wayning_Star wrote...

Ieldra2 wrote...

Wayning_Star wrote...
Even astute Ieldra2 misses the mark when postulating a postition on Synthesis. Understandable,as it's never explained. The base of it is this. Synthesis changes you not the other way around, no matter how you slice it, Nature it's self is altered to admit technological intelligence to share the wealth of Nature it's self. No organic can state they came first anymore, within that new structure.

Nature, with it's apparent cycle of evolution, has created the mess and it's Nature it's self that what's got to change to correct it. Otherwise organics must learn to deal with nature without the aid synthetic intelligent life.

You don't seriously expect me to accept a pseudomystical explanation like that, do you? First, "Nature" isn't an entity, it doesn't do things. Things just happen according to certain laws. Also, there exists non-living matter. Second, the idea that "nature" is opposed to "artifice" (technology) is a Romantic conceit and simply false. Historically, they have been *aesthetic* opposites, but that's meaningless anywhere outside of art and doesn't carry over into physics. For that reason, technological intelligence does not exist separate from nature and doesn't need to be integrated into it. It already is, like everything else that exists.

Synthesis is a change in, or of, the chemical building blocks used by organic life, plus, apparently, a rewriting of specific types of information processing in the brains of synthetics. Apart from that, it may add things to the bodies of organics which are then integrated as "natural" parts of their bodies. Whatever it is, and as "space-magical" as the process that enacts the change comes across, in the end it's science and technology, not mysticism. We are attempting to describe Synthesis in terms of science and technology. Describing it using mystical concepts is no help at all.

Complication of an issue doesn't mean you've accomplished understanding of that issue.

Yeah, things can appear so simple when you take metaphors for reality. Next you'll come up with biosynthetic DNA like Mac Walters... Give me an elegant and simple explanation in meaningful scientific and technological terms which I haven't already come up with, and I'll concede the point.

of course nature isn't an 'entity', in the sense of being, it is however the root of learning, as adaption is necessary for survival,and apparently evolution.

The science isn't possible unless you're privy to the pretence of it's existence, we are not, only the results are only alluded to. There isn't any peer review of hard data on it, nor peers to consider, other than the catalyst and the engineers of the crucible. They're not talking about it, informing Shepard of any science, only the catalyst alludes to the results, before choices are made. Those choices are left by unknown quantity as well. Shep is left with a best guess scenerio at best, trusting in the logic of the catalyst and it's representation of Synthesis.

IN the end, all choices are dependent on the Catalyst, and trust in the choices menu authors, as being true to the needs of the MEU. Doesn't matter what choice is made, they're all experimental, without technical explanation in any form.

The idea is not to understand the choices so much as to understan which is best for the MEU at large.  You needn't concede anything, your intentions are quite honorable, if not exaggerated in and attempt to explain a total unknown. Parible and anology is all that is there to go on. Apples and oranges, I'm afraid.

IF all indications of the synthesis choice is true to its description, then it's the most potent and effective choice to complete Sheps mission, and end the reaper threat, stop the chaos for a time, at least deminish it as well as chaos, it's the best Shep can do for any longer term 'solution' to the catalyst and the Leviathan quandry.

You're forgetting something: the ME Universe is not a Platonic universe where concepts can interact as if they were entities. That means, allegory and symbolism have no explanatory power if they aren't grounded in in-world logic. Basically, the allegories tell us absolutely nothing except the direction of the writers' intent. 

I'll give you an example: in BG2, the antagonist stole the protagonist's soul. Nobody thought to question that, nobody asked "He stole what?" because this story was ruled by the genre conventions of fantasy, where gods walking the Earth and souls are commonly accepted as story elements. If you try to use an analogous concept in a science fiction universe, you have to establish it in terms commonly accepted in science fiction, and you have to do it explicitly and do it early in the story. Peter F Hamilton did that successfully in the "Night's Dawn" cycle by having the *prologue* (!!!) tell us that sapience creates some sort of extradimensional energy structure and that it's possible for a living being to exist in form of such a structure. He did this so well that his story never drifted off into fantasy in spite of featuring an interstellar zombie apocalypse.

Now switch to the ME universe. At two specific points in the trilogy, the concept of a soul is alluded to: in the Lazarus Project and in the Synthesis ending. However, it has never been established in terms acceptable to science fiction as being part of this universe, and it's not a story element commonly accepted in science fiction in the first place. As a result, attempts to explain Lazarus and the Synthesis in these terms are non-existent. Discerning players recognize the attempt but things like "add your energy to the Crucible" just come across as silly and stupid. 

In other words, if you use mystical concepts, allegories and symbolism without anchoring them in the logic of your fictional world, your story - at least the story element which uses them - will fail. I can accept the "stolen soul" in BG2 without further elaboration because it is a defining trait of fantasy that the allegorical can be real, but I would never, ever accept something similar in ME. The alluded-to "sacrifice of Shepard's soul" in Synthesis has no explanatory power. It doesn't even have a meaning in this universe. it doesn't exist except as an allegory. It tells us nothing about what happens. We end up with no information at all except that the writer either made a galaxy-sized blunder or set out to insult the intelligence of the players. The writer treated his science fiction universe as if it was a fantasy universe.

So of course we set out to explain Synthesis in terms of the MEU's internal logic, using concepts established throughout the trilogy and common science fiction genre conventions. There is no other way to explain it, because explanations in other terms come across as nonsensical or meaningless.

Modifié par Ieldra2, 09 février 2013 - 09:30 .

[Nimrodell]

I just wonder if ME writers were somehow influenced by quantum mysticism when they made the concept of synthesis. Ieldra, when you have time and will and if you didn't watch it, please see this controversial movie made in 2004 - What the Bleep Do We Know. You'll even see some familiar scenes there... and it's probably coincidence, but nevertheless.

[Ieldra]

Nimrodell wrote...
I just wonder if ME writers were somehow influenced by quantum mysticism when they made the concept of synthesis. Ieldra, when you have time and will and if you didn't watch it, please see this controversial movie made in 2004 - What the Bleep Do We Know. You'll even see some familiar scenes there... and it's probably coincidence, but nevertheless.

Grrr.....I can't watch that because of regional copyright restrictions. Is it, perhaps, available on a less censored platform? If not, can you summarize it?

Edit:
All right. Found another online version. Watched a part. I think the hypothesis that consciousness is more than an emergent property of matter cannot be upheld at this time, and anyway, if the ME Universe had such a concept it would've needed to be established as being part of the fabric of the universe early in the story. Staging it as a scientific revelation would've required the story to deal with it more explicitly. I've read a lot of SF that used analogous premises over the years. I've practically grown up with a long-running SF series (still running today 50 years afters its inception) that did. In ME, no such thing is built into the fabric of the universe. If Mac Walters expected it to be taken for granted, he's read too many comic books and too little science fiction.

Modifié par Ieldra2, 09 février 2013 - 12:44 .

[Nimrodell]

Ah, darn it - well, synopsis can be found here, though it's very hard to actually retale and summarize it - explain in short text what they are talking about (the merge of quantum physics and religion). Now, the review that summarizes the movie (the one that says that all things professed by 'quantum mystics' is mere BS and hilarious) can be found here (you'll find interesting things in that one - the focus should be on Molecules of Emotion). I just wondered if BW writers actually took parts of some of these ideas (Javik, Protheans and their sensory ability and then Shepard being dispersed as the 'new information' atoms throughout the galaxy - being imparted into every being).

I don't suggest this movie and these stands as something that might be correct - and yet, I do see strange similarity between ME3 synthesis and quantum mysticism - even when it comes to reaction of movie audience and the players here.

[Ieldra]

Also, if you consider EDI's unused audio for the Reaper reveal in ME2 (I linked it in the third post on this page), I don't think something like quantum mysticism was ever really thought of as being part of the MEU. It's very down-to-earth and scientific, and as opposed to what was then published, it made a great deal of sense. I think the writers wanted various aspects of their universe to be open to an interpretation along those lines, but that didn't work because if a concept you use needs underpinnings built into the structure of the universe, you need to establish it firmly. Being vaguely suggestive is as if you were vaguely suggestive about the Force in SW, always vaguely suggesting that something like it might exist but never letting characters talk about it. It would have been a dismal failure.

Modifié par Ieldra2, 09 février 2013 - 12:55 .

[Wayning_Star]

mvaning wrote...

Wayning_Star wrote...

IF all indications of the synthesis choice is true to its description, then it's the most potent and effective choice to complete Sheps mission, and end the reaper threat, stop the chaos for a time, at least deminish it as well as chaos, it's the best Shep can do for any longer term 'solution' to the catalyst and the Leviathan quandry.

Shepard's mission is not to stop chaos however. His goal is to stop the reapers. In that regard, the destroy option is the best choice. Evolution is not a concept to be viewed as a nature's way of making oneself better. That's not how it works. Evolution IS adaptation for survival. (All basic science, just read Darwin's theory in high school biology books. )

The catalyst views life as chaotic because he is not an organic, he cannot understand the natural order of things. The same way that EDI has to be nurtured into understanding human emotions and morality. The catalyst views Synthesis as the apex of evolution because he does not understand that life is dictated by a natural order that is not governed by anything that is understandable.

His option is to force evolution to stop the chaos. This is the wrong choice because what he thinks of as evolution and how the crucible works can not equal what the actual apex of evolution is.

This is an analogue to the Heisenberg uncertainty principle. You can never know the exact position of an electron because the act of determining its position changes its position. In the same way, you can never know what the apex of evolution is because any attempt to determine it or to force it will change the variables and whatever that apex is will change.

With this in mind, it can be seen that any and all of his solutions will not stop the chaos. His solutions are all futile. In the same regard, his goal is to stop the chaos using the reapers. While Synthesis might stop the chaos for a short time, the forcing of it will change the variables. There is nothing to say that chaos will eventually start again and the reapers will again become a threat.

The best solution is to allow the chaos to happen. Evolution is not a peaceful or orderly occurrence. It happens through destruction, violence and the fight for survival. To try to control these things is inevitably futile. Therefor, the most effective option is to destroy the reapers and allow universe to take its course.

Then to say, or accept Shep as not being part of nature and the universe in Destroy is not chosen?

S'funny how the mind will work when it wants something to come to pass, even if futile..lol

[Wayning_Star]

Nimrodell wrote...

Ah, darn it - well, synopsis can be found here, though it's very hard to actually retale and summarize it - explain in short text what they are talking about (the merge of quantum physics and religion). Now, the review that summarizes the movie (the one that says that all things professed by 'quantum mystics' is mere BS and hilarious) can be found here (you'll find interesting things in that one - the focus should be on Molecules of Emotion). I just wondered if BW writers actually took parts of some of these ideas (Javik, Protheans and their sensory ability and then Shepard being dispersed as the 'new information' atoms throughout the galaxy - being imparted into every being).

I don't suggest this movie and these stands as something that might be correct - and yet, I do see strange similarity between ME3 synthesis and quantum mysticism - even when it comes to reaction of movie audience and the players here.

Its my quantum and I'll consider what I want to.

really tho, one beings mysticism is anothers religious views. But then, as I've been chastised to look as Nature may be the culprit in all things MEU and it's beings as the only real intellects within. But many doubt that as being the ideal behind the questions posed as choices within the story of the MEU.

It's weird how the old sart gazer enjoys telling the story of Shepard, but never lets the kid (catalyst) know what the best choices Shep made to relate to that reality... The little boy, all open minded and optimistical about his future,as in the thought of being able to 'go to the stars'.. The old mans response is rather arbitrary.

Oh, and most shouldn't metagame to alter the MEU reality to fit their own. That's Godhead.

Modifié par Wayning_Star, 09 février 2013 - 03:36 .

[Ieldra]

Here's a question I'd like to ask those who choose Synthesis:

We don't see a relay in the Synthesis epilogue. We don't see the Citadel. As opposed to both Control and Destroy. What do you think happened to them?

There isn't any real limit on what might be plausible or not. We only know that the relays have been damaged. It's very possible they'll be repaired just like in Control, so if that's anyone's favorite scenario, there's nothing to say against it, but I think it would be thematically appropriate to posit that the relays are left behind along with all the other relics of the age gone by. Post-Synthesis civilization will find more elegant ways to travel between the stars. I have outlined one such scenario in my pre-EC thread "Out of the dark age: relays, FTL and rebuilding galactic civilization" (scroll far down in the OP). This scenario has the advantage that it still uses eezo and the mass effect, and that it is open for further extension into the exotic.

Any other ideas? What would you consider a thematically appropriate method for post-Synthesis civilization to travel between the stars?

Modifié par Ieldra2, 13 février 2013 - 11:19 .

[Steelcan]

Question Ieldra, I just finished up ME2 and got all the Legion conversations, but I never got him talking about the nature of the Reapers. Or does have another conversation after the Dyson Sphere one?

[Ieldra]

Steelcan wrote...
Question Ieldra, I just finished up ME2 and got all the Legion conversations, but I never got him talking about the nature of the Reapers. Or does have another conversation after the Dyson Sphere one?

Yeah, that one is hard to get. Here's how you do it:

(1) Exhaust all of Legion's conversations before the SM. More specifically, you need to get the Dyson Sphere conversation before you start the SM. This means you need to have at least four (five? I don't recall exactly) non-DLC missions and/or N7 assignments left open when you finish Reaper IFF, and it means you have to do them all before the SM to get all of Legion's conversations, sacrificing at least half of your crew.

(2) When you get to the Dyson Sphere conversation, you can comment that the Dyson Sphere appears suspiciously similar to a Reaper, considering what Sovereign said. You have to take that option.

(3) Do the SM.

(4) Talk with Legion after the SM. Take the option "You knew what they are". That's leading to the explanation of the nature of the Reapers.

Modifié par Ieldra2, 13 février 2013 - 01:21 .

[Obadiah]

I looked at Synthesis as an exponential increase to the power-of-one. Technology currently gets more and more miniaturized so as to make it more portable and easy to use. We're doing it with communication and computing power now, but I think it will get that way with transport as well.

I think the Relays will probably be fixed just to get galactic commerce and civilization back on track, but they will eventually be left behind, along with the need for big vehicles for personal transport. We'll be be in, to refer to my old comics, ROM: Space Knight and Silver Surfer (Green Lantern?) territory.

Individuals with the proper tech integration and space suits will be able to generate personal Mass Effect fields so powerful that they will be able to just zip through space on their own. Imagine Iron Man, but with to ability to fly across the galaxy.

This is and image from the ROM comic book. This is the kind of thing I'm thinking of for FTL travel; maybe 100 years post Synthesis:

Modifié par Obadiah, 13 février 2013 - 02:30 .

[Mouton_Alpha]

Ieldra2 wrote...

Steelcan wrote...
Question Ieldra, I just finished up ME2 and got all the Legion conversations, but I never got him talking about the nature of the Reapers. Or does have another conversation after the Dyson Sphere one?

Yeah, that one is hard to get. Here's how you do it:

For the people who are too lazy and self-absorbed to replay the whole game just to get the dialogue:

Modifié par Mouton_Alpha, 13 février 2013 - 02:23 .

[Ieldra]

Obadiah wrote...
I looked at Synthesis as an exponential increase to the power-of-one. Technology currently gets more and more miniaturized so as to make it more portable and easy to use. We're doing it with communication and computing power now, but I think it will get that way with transport as well.

I think the Relays will probably be fixed just to get galactic commerce and civilization back on track, but they will eventually be left behind, along with the need for big vehicles for personal transport. We'll be be in, to refer to my old comics, ROM: Space Knight and Silver Surfer (Green Lantern?) territory.

Individuals with the proper tech integration and space suits will be able to generate personal Mass Effect fields so powerful that they will be able to just zip through space on their own. Imagine Iron Man, but with to ability to fly across the galaxy.

I see our visions go into the same direction. The difference is I don't want to go quite that far into comic-book territory, if only because it becomes increasingly more difficult to rationalize the science. Hyper-advanced ME-style transportation has the potential to turn into an "unlimited FTL" scenario, and that's boring. Among other things, that's why I make the technology small by need and leave the relays destroyed. So, small starships and eventually technologically upgraded individuals will be able to make spacetime jumps, but transportation of bulk goods by relay-like jump technology remains uneconomical or even impossible. Civilization will have to rely on non-jump FTL for that, which will increase travel times for large ships to months and years. I want to keep space big.