171 Antworten in diesem Thema

[GreyLycanTrope]

Ieldra2 wrote...

@Greylycantrope:
Please note that I'm using that line only as a hook. Of course it's not enough to foreshadow the ending on its own. But if you accept my hypothesis, it's easy to see where there was some intended foreshadowing that didn't work. If it had worked, the ending scenario wouldn't have come out of nowhere.

I read it, still have issues with the hypothesis, guess I should have clarified that bit, organics and synthetics having different thought patterns wasn't that prevailent. Basically what we've seen through out the series is that different species have different perseptives and that even individuals within the same species have the different perspectives that might seem alien to others.

I think the writers expected us to see synthetic life forms as
fundamentally different, they expected we had to learn to consider them
as valid life forms. Recall how hard the geth plot in ME3 stresses the
fact that the geth were defending themselves? As if we didn't know that
already - it's been in the Codex since ME1 and was a topic in several
conversations. We even get to say "they just defended themselvs" to Tali
in ME1!
I don't know about others, but I never saw synthetics as
fundamentally "other", and I always considered the geth as "just
enemies". That they were synthetics was strictly accidental and had no
bearing on the interaction. If that's the same for most of us - and from
what I've been reading on the forums I think it is - then the writers
have drastically underestimated our willingness to consider synthetic
life forms as valid right from the start. So, when the topic was brought
up in the ending, most of us would go "WTF? That's been dealt with. The
geth were enemies, and now they're not any more. Or did you [the
writers] think we would think synthetics unable to keep peace? After all
you've been writing about the geth's desire for peaceful coexistence?"

I agree that the Geth being synthetics was largely incidental, after all we've had humans being at odds with Turians, tension can exist between different groups that's just the way of things.

I think the writers expected us to lump the Reapers together with the
geth into the "synthetic" and thus "other" category of life. So that
while we were learning to accept synthetics as people, we would also
consider the possibility that the Reapers were "just enemies" and
otherwise valid forms of life.
What brought that to ruin so
completely that there was no recovery was that they pushed the horror up
to eleven in ME2 and again in ME3. To estimate the role of the
"abomination aesthetic", consider how you would've reacted if the
Reapers had harvested organics, but in a somewhat "cleaner", more
clinical way, without all the unnecessary pain and the re-use of organic
body parts for their minions. What if the Reaper minions had been
machines instead of travesties of existing species? I venture to guess
that many of us would have been rather more ready to see the Reapers as
"just enemies" instead of "eldritch abominations", enemies with which to
make peace was generally considered possible.

This is the point of disconnect with the hypothesis for me, presentation wasn't really the issue for the Reapers. Here's the difference the geth fighting for surivial is far easier to accomidate in terms of coexistance, basically it's an agreement from both sides not to try and kill eradicate each other just because the other one exists. The Reapers on the other hand have a view that without their intervention all life is doomed. It wasn't just their methods I take issue with it's their opposition to self determination, they won't leave us alone, their sole reason for existing is to interfer with our development. So I don't find them irredeemable because they've been portrayed as the boogeyman and can't sympathize with their view point, they are just enemies to me, just not enemies I'm able to compromise with.

Bearbeitet von Greylycantrope, 15 Dezember 2012 - 05:53 .

[Ieldra]

Jade8aby88 wrote...
Nice thread. But I hope the writer's interpretation was not that synthetics are fundamentally different, because given the character development of EDI and Legion. They shouldn't be.

I think there is such an underlying assumption, mainly in the perceived incapability of synthetics to feel genuine emotion. Note how post-Synthesis, we see EDI smiling and hugging Garrus. She had never smiled before and was always more detached. She showed determination in the FOB scene, but her post-Synthesis appearance was markedly different from before.

There appear to be three fundamental assumptions:
(1) Synthetics cannot feel genuine emotion, or at least have a much more limited capacity for it. See EDI; and that's why Control is considered a sacrifice by Paragon Shepard. It removes one of the defining aspects of what makes you human. The capacity for genuine emotion appears to be considered an objectively desirable trait, which means synthetics are "lesser" unless they acquire that trait.
(2) Human-like individuality is required for life to be really valid. Thus, pre-Rannoch geth are not considered equal to organics before and unless they acquire the Reaper upgrade.
(3) The Reapers represent the transcendent in good ways as well as bad ways: Reaper tech is used to bring Shepard back from the dead, and Reaper upgrades give the geth individuality.

BTW, thanks for the compliment

Bearbeitet von Ieldra2, 15 Dezember 2012 - 05:46 .

[Meltemph]

I don't think there was much foreshadowing at all. I think what we saw were parts of a story where writers wanted to express certain view points, but honestly, I think it is pretty obvious they didn't know where they were going with the setting. ME2s plot/story, while I think it was the best one as a whole, is evidence to this, that they didn't really know at all where the story was going to land.

Honestly I think you are giving them too much credit, I dont think beyond the very stereotypical "Gods vs creation" viewpoint, that there was much more to it then that. Sure they wanted to try and make the decisions of that view point harder to make, but they never in teh game examined the societal reasons as to why they would be "feared" in the 1st place, which puts the "theme" in the light of a typical TV trope.

Quite frankly the 3 games lack of continuity or cohesion as a plot/story on the whole, I think, makes any intent they had in conveying a theme all but impossible.

[Reorte]

Interesting thread and I mostly agree with the OP.

In some ways the synthetics are fundamentally different - the individually non-sentient but overall intelligent with enough working together minds of the geth are a great example for that. It's a great pity that come ME3 someone decided that "But they would be much better and more alive if they were made more like us." It's sad that such an attempt was made to put down what had, to me, seemed like a completely alien but equally valid (and for once fairly convincing) form of life.

The problem wasn't difference but the assumption that that's bad and will inevitably lead to conflict, and that we'd all assume that being made more like us represents improvement.

[Belisarius25]

The problem wasn't difference but the assumption that that's bad and will inevitably lead to conflict, and that we'd all assume that being made more like us represents improvement.

It's particularly jarring in a playthrough where you've brought peace to the Geth/Quarian conflict and both species are working together. Unless I missed a dialogue option in the Catalyst conversations, you can't even bring that up.

Bearbeitet von Belisarius25, 15 Dezember 2012 - 05:52 .

[TheProtheans]

They was never really an Organic - Synthetic conflict for me.
The Reapers were the reason some of the Geth were mislead into battle.
That continued into Mass effect 2.
Overload is a symbol of the Reapers, when you do something the Reapers do in turning Organics into abominations, it will not end well.
Overload taught me the lesson that Organics and computers should never attempt to become one.

Quarians - Geth.
Well really it has nothing to do with them been synthetics, if you created something and thought it might take over your planet you would be annoyed, you would try to stop it be Organic or Synthetic.

[Dr_Extrem]

Belisarius25 wrote...

The problem wasn't difference but the assumption that that's bad and will inevitably lead to conflict, and that we'd all assume that being made more like us represents improvement.

It's particularly jarring in a playthrough where you've brought peace to the Geth/Quarian conflict and both species are working together. Unless I missed a dialogue option in the Catalyst conversations, you can't even bring that up.

this is jarring in any playthrough

you resolve this conflict - either way.

1. you kill the quarians - geth live in peace with the rest of the universe
2. you kill the geth - no more synthetics left to threaten us
3.you broker peace between the faction - no more conflict


the conflict will be resolved - no matter how you play.

[o Ventus]

Ieldra2 wrote...

Statements from Bioware and evidence from ME2. They said they decided the overarching plot "early". Also, had the old Dark Energy plot still been on the table when ME2 was produced, they wouldn't have cut off the dark energy angle of the Haestrom mission. At the same time, it can't have been much earlier, or that part of the Haestrom mission wouldn't have existed in the first place. Given that missions are designed early in development and most of the development time goes into production I conclude the decision must've been made early in the development cycle of ME2.

Aside from Overlord and Tali's loyalty and recruitment, what story missions involved fighting synthetics? Of those, which missions involved fighting synthetics because of "irreconcilable differences"? 

What statements? You mean like that statement from Mac Walters where he admits that the team was essentially making the story up as they went along?

[Dr_Extrem]

o Ventus wrote...

Ieldra2 wrote...

Statements from Bioware and evidence from ME2. They said they decided the overarching plot "early". Also, had the old Dark Energy plot still been on the table when ME2 was produced, they wouldn't have cut off the dark energy angle of the Haestrom mission. At the same time, it can't have been much earlier, or that part of the Haestrom mission wouldn't have existed in the first place. Given that missions are designed early in development and most of the development time goes into production I conclude the decision must've been made early in the development cycle of ME2.

Aside from Overlord and Tali's loyalty and recruitment, what story missions involved fighting synthetics? Of those, which missions involved fighting synthetics because of "irreconcilable differences"? 

What statements? You mean like that statement from Mac Walters where he admits that the team was essentially making the story up as they went along?

talis and legions missions were mostly about the conflict between geth and quarians ..

the 5% who joined sovereign became "reapers" - they choosed their side willingly.

overlord was confusing but it was "just" about performing experiments on geth. there was no real conflict .. just space-mengele doing his "work". i hated archer and i really wanted to send his ass to the alliance for trial.

[In Exile]

o Ventus wrote...

What statements? You mean like that statement from Mac Walters where he admits that the team was essentially making the story up as they went along?

The writers (at least at Bio) always make up the story as they go along (or, rather, they can't afford, like a TV serial, to be stuck with one version of the script). There are story changes, gameplay problems (e.g. Therum was supposed to have us actually go through Prothean ruins). 

The real issue is that the writers jumped themes. Because in ME1 "humanity is special" was the theme, and us entering galactic civilization and what our future/fate etc. would be was the essence of ME. That's the whole point of the different endings and Renegade/Paragon. It was about what our future was, with the Reapers as the backdrop.

ME2 picked up the irrelevant Cerberus sideplot (I wish I could find the link, but Bio confirmed Cerberus was by no means planned) and didn't move the plot forward with ME2 (more like rebooted the series from ME1!) and lost the thread of that theme. But ME2 still kept the whole forge your own destiny theme. That was a capstone in Mordin's speech.

Synthetics vs. Organics was just never a major theme. If in ME2 the enemies weren't the collectors, but the geth, then maybe ME3 might have made sense. 

[MegaSovereign]

Wasn't it in the ME1 artbook that the organic vs synthetic theme was the underlying theme of the series or something?

[Dr_Extrem]

MegaSovereign wrote...

Wasn't it in the ME1 artbook that the organic vs synthetic theme was the underlying theme of the series or something?

but in mass effect 1, the reapers were the synthetics and not organic goo pumped into a robot-shell.

[Iakus]

Ieldra2 wrote...

Jade8aby88 wrote...
Nice thread. But I hope the writer's interpretation was not that synthetics are fundamentally different, because given the character development of EDI and Legion. They shouldn't be.

I think there is such an underlying assumption, mainly in the perceived incapability of synthetics to feel genuine emotion. Note how post-Synthesis, we see EDI smiling and hugging Garrus. She had never smiled before and was always more detached. She showed determination in the FOB scene, but her post-Synthesis appearance was markedly different from before.

There appear to be three fundamental assumptions:
(1) Synthetics cannot feel genuine emotion, or at least have a much more limited capacity for it. See EDI; and that's why Control is considered a sacrifice by Paragon Shepard. It removes one of the defining aspects of what makes you human. The capacity for genuine emotion appears to be considered an objectively desirable trait, which means synthetics are "lesser" unless they acquire that trait.
(2) Human-like individuality is required for life to be really valid. Thus, pre-Rannoch geth are not considered equal to organics before and unless they acquire the Reaper upgrade.
(3) The Reapers represent the transcendent in good ways as well as bad ways: Reaper tech is used to bring Shepard back from the dead, and Reaper upgrades give the geth individuality.

BTW, thanks for the compliment

1) It has always been my belief that while synthetics do not feel emotions the same as organics, they have their own versions of it.  Just talking to Legion on Rannoch indicates that he did indeed feel emotions.  And over the course of the game, EDI seems to become more and more human.  By the forward base on Earth, EDI tells Shepard that she felt alive thanks lagely to Shepard's example.

2) Personally I never felt the need for everything to be human-like.  Aliens are alien.  That is neither a good or bad thing.  It's just different.  As Legion said in ME2: "No two species are identical.  All must be judged by their own merits.  Treating every species like one's own is racist.  Even benign anthropomorphism"

3) Wait, what?  Shepard was brought back with Reaper tech?  That's always been a personal theory of mine, but was that ever confirmed?

[MegaSovereign]

Dr_Extrem wrote...

MegaSovereign wrote...

Wasn't it in the ME1 artbook that the organic vs synthetic theme was the underlying theme of the series or something?

but in mass effect 1, the reapers were the synthetics and not organic goo pumped into a robot-shell.

So they changed direction pre-ME2 and then revisited the theme in Overlord.

I don't see how you could make the argument that it was *never* a big theme for Mass Effect. That's just silly.

Oh and to clarify, the organic vs synthetic theme is not about how synthetics are evil robotz. That's an oversimplification of the theme and is arguably incorrect.

[Jadebaby]

Even if Synthesis is right, I don't want the Reapers to live. That's the bottom line, that's what I've been fighting for with my Shepard for 5 damn years.

[Chashan]

Dr_Extrem wrote...

o Ventus wrote...

Ieldra2 wrote...

Statements from Bioware and evidence from ME2. They said they decided the overarching plot "early". Also, had the old Dark Energy plot still been on the table when ME2 was produced, they wouldn't have cut off the dark energy angle of the Haestrom mission. At the same time, it can't have been much earlier, or that part of the Haestrom mission wouldn't have existed in the first place. Given that missions are designed early in development and most of the development time goes into production I conclude the decision must've been made early in the development cycle of ME2.

Aside from Overlord and Tali's loyalty and recruitment, what story missions involved fighting synthetics? Of those, which missions involved fighting synthetics because of "irreconcilable differences"? 

What statements? You mean like that statement from Mac Walters where he admits that the team was essentially making the story up as they went along?

talis and legions missions were mostly about the conflict between geth and quarians ..

the 5% who joined sovereign became "reapers" - they choosed their side willingly.

overlord was confusing but it was "just" about performing experiments on geth. there was no real conflict .. just space-mengele doing his "work". i hated archer and i really wanted to send his ass to the alliance for trial.

Yep, Overlord, above all else, again underlines how much of a bunch of "space-****s" - actual dev-note quote, if I recall correctly - Kerberos are.

There is one chain of side-missions in ME2 as well where VI-powered LOKI-mech production gone rogue needs some putting down, although it is more of the mindless berserk-variant instead of fully fleshed anti-orga crusade.

On the whole, initial statement is indeed all too true: had BW wanted, they would have needed to stick to the way ME1 mostly presented AI-constructs. They did not, however. Beginning with Legion and EDI in ME2, there is a definite tonal shift happening in that regard. Of course, staying suspicious of them and maintaining hostility towards these skips this type of content altogether, likely lending the last minute-central theme more credence.
All things told, however, the way this was done is just irreconciliable with the drastically different path presented and available from ME2 on: actual understanding and cooperation between organics and machine-constructs.

[dreman9999]

It's not that it's easily missed, it's that the player can easily be distracted by the facts. They only had this concept subtly in the majority of the story, from every mech in ME2 to the reapers themselves. They never bluntly state it as the main theme, not even in the end.

Added, people stating the overall theme is organic vs machines missed what the themes is...It's Self determination vs control. The catalyst issue is not the issue of the game. Your missing the fact here that the catalyst only thinks it's a problem because it's programmed to.

[Dr_Extrem]

MegaSovereign wrote...

Dr_Extrem wrote...

MegaSovereign wrote...

Wasn't it in the ME1 artbook that the organic vs synthetic theme was the underlying theme of the series or something?

but in mass effect 1, the reapers were the synthetics and not organic goo pumped into a robot-shell.

So they changed direction pre-ME2 and then revisited the theme in Overlord.

I don't see how you could make the argument that it was *never* a big theme for Mass Effect. That's just silly.

Oh and to clarify, the organic vs synthetic theme is not about how synthetics are evil robotz. That's an oversimplification of the theme and is arguably incorrect.

reapers and geth are different things. the theme of overlord was about the geth and cerberus attempt to control them. in mass effect 1, the reapers were called synthetics. it was an observation and not a statement.

i consider synthetics and reapers as two different factions - even it the reapers were meant to be synthetic in mass effect 1.

[In Exile]

Ieldra2 wrote...
(1) Synthetics cannot feel genuine emotion, or at least have a much more limited capacity for it. See EDI; and that's why Control is considered a sacrifice by Paragon Shepard. It removes one of the defining aspects of what makes you human. The capacity for genuine emotion appears to be considered an objectively desirable trait, which means synthetics are "lesser" unless they acquire that trait.  

Which, funny, enough, is what makes AI so ridiculously impossible in ME, from a cog-sci standpoint. Emotions, at least functionally (rather than our subjective experience of it) serve really important information processing functions that - quite arguably - would make any kind of sentience that we see impossible.

[dreman9999]

Chashan wrote...

Dr_Extrem wrote...

o Ventus wrote...

Ieldra2 wrote...

Statements from Bioware and evidence from ME2. They said they decided the overarching plot "early". Also, had the old Dark Energy plot still been on the table when ME2 was produced, they wouldn't have cut off the dark energy angle of the Haestrom mission. At the same time, it can't have been much earlier, or that part of the Haestrom mission wouldn't have existed in the first place. Given that missions are designed early in development and most of the development time goes into production I conclude the decision must've been made early in the development cycle of ME2.

Aside from Overlord and Tali's loyalty and recruitment, what story missions involved fighting synthetics? Of those, which missions involved fighting synthetics because of "irreconcilable differences"? 

What statements? You mean like that statement from Mac Walters where he admits that the team was essentially making the story up as they went along?

talis and legions missions were mostly about the conflict between geth and quarians ..

the 5% who joined sovereign became "reapers" - they choosed their side willingly.

overlord was confusing but it was "just" about performing experiments on geth. there was no real conflict .. just space-mengele doing his "work". i hated archer and i really wanted to send his ass to the alliance for trial.

Yep, Overlord, above all else, again underlines how much of a bunch of "space-****s" - actual dev-note quote, if I recall correctly - Kerberos are.

There is one chain of side-missions in ME2 as well where VI-powered LOKI-mech production gone rogue needs some putting down, although it is more of the mindless berserk-variant instead of fully fleshed anti-orga crusade.

On the whole, initial statement is indeed all too true: had BW wanted, they would have needed to stick to the way ME1 mostly presented AI-constructs. They did not, however. Beginning with Legion and EDI in ME2, there is a definite tonal shift happening in that regard. Of course, staying suspicious of them and maintaining hostility towards these skips this type of content altogether, likely lending the last minute-central theme more credence.
All things told, however, the way this was done is just irreconciliable with the drastically different path presented and available from ME2 on: actual understanding and cooperation between organics and machine-constructs.

That was just a shift to a 2 sided arguement. Most people thatbring up this change in the look on the organic /synthetic conflict miss the fact here that it equal the fault of both organic and synthetics. ME2 just show side of synthetics on teh arguement and the faults of organics on the issue.

[o Ventus]

MegaSovereign wrote...

I don't see how you could make the argument that it was *never* a big theme for Mass Effect. That's just silly.

Oh and to clarify, the organic vs synthetic theme is not about how synthetics are evil robotz. That's an oversimplification of the theme and is arguably incorrect.

The Catalyst tells Shepard to his face that synthetics fight organics because of irreconcilable differences between them.

[Ieldra]

Greylycantrope wrote...
This is the point of disconnect with the hypothesis for me, presentation wasn't really the issue for the Reapers. Here's the difference the geth fighting for surivial is far easier to accomidate in terms of coexistance, basically it's an agreement from both sides not to try and kill eradicate each other just because the other one exists. The Reapers on the other hand have a view that without their intervention all life is doomed. It wasn't just their methods I take issue with it's their opposition to self determination, they won't leave us alone, their sole reason for existing is to interfer with our development. So I don't find them irredeemable because they've been portrayed as the boogeyman and can't sympathize with their view point, they are just enemies to me, just not enemies I'm able to compromise with.

While individuals differ vastly in their reaction, here's why I think the presentation had a big influence on players overall:

(1) Human morality isn't primarily rational. Many of the arguments about morality we're using are rationalizations of things we feel at a more visceral level. You notice where moral reasoning becomes prevalent where the results of that reasoning disagree with what you're feeling.

(2) We humans have an intrinsic tendency to equal the beautiful and the good, the ugly and the bad. This works on an emotional level and we can only overcome it through self-reflection and conscious effort.

That means, if you feel any level of moral outrage towards the Reapers, a part of that outrage will exist because of the visual presentation. ME3's focus on giving players an emotional experience exacerbates that problem. I don't know about you, but I get a "feel, don't think" vibe from several scenes in ME3. 

[MegaSovereign]

Dr_Extrem wrote...

MegaSovereign wrote...

Dr_Extrem wrote...

MegaSovereign wrote...

Wasn't it in the ME1 artbook that the organic vs synthetic theme was the underlying theme of the series or something?

but in mass effect 1, the reapers were the synthetics and not organic goo pumped into a robot-shell.

So they changed direction pre-ME2 and then revisited the theme in Overlord.

I don't see how you could make the argument that it was *never* a big theme for Mass Effect. That's just silly.

Oh and to clarify, the organic vs synthetic theme is not about how synthetics are evil robotz. That's an oversimplification of the theme and is arguably incorrect.

reapers and geth are different things. the theme of overlord was about the geth and cerberus attempt to control them. in mass effect 1, the reapers were called synthetics. it was an observation and not a statement.

i consider synthetics and reapers as two different factions - even it the reapers were meant to be synthetic in mass effect 1.

You know that's the basis of pretty much every organic vs synthetic conflict right? It starts when organics try to control synthetics.

Synthetics are very rarely the instigators of the conflict. The only exception to this are the Reapers, but their motivations are to prevent this conflict.

o Ventus wrote...

MegaSovereign wrote...

I don't see how you could make the argument that it was *never* a big theme for Mass Effect. That's just silly.

Oh
and to clarify, the organic vs synthetic theme is not about how
synthetics are evil robotz. That's an oversimplification of the theme
and is arguably incorrect.

The Catalyst tells Shepard to his face that synthetics fight organics because of irreconcilable differences between them.

Nope. He says that the created will always rebel against their creators. The reason for the rebellion is obviously inferred. Just think back to how every organic vs synthetic conflict starts: Organics trying to control synthetics.

Bearbeitet von MegaSovereign, 15 Dezember 2012 - 06:28 .

[Dr_Extrem]

MegaSovereign wrote...

Dr_Extrem wrote...

MegaSovereign wrote...

Dr_Extrem wrote...

MegaSovereign wrote...

Wasn't it in the ME1 artbook that the organic vs synthetic theme was the underlying theme of the series or something?

but in mass effect 1, the reapers were the synthetics and not organic goo pumped into a robot-shell.

So they changed direction pre-ME2 and then revisited the theme in Overlord.

I don't see how you could make the argument that it was *never* a big theme for Mass Effect. That's just silly.

Oh and to clarify, the organic vs synthetic theme is not about how synthetics are evil robotz. That's an oversimplification of the theme and is arguably incorrect.

reapers and geth are different things. the theme of overlord was about the geth and cerberus attempt to control them. in mass effect 1, the reapers were called synthetics. it was an observation and not a statement.

i consider synthetics and reapers as two different factions - even it the reapers were meant to be synthetic in mass effect 1.

You know that's the basis of pretty much every organic vs synthetic conflict right? It starts when organics try to control synthetics.

Synthetics are very rarely the instigators of the conflict. The only exception to this are the Reapers, but their motivations are to prevent this conflict.

not from the catalysts pov ..

it just atstes, that synthetics will kill organics and that the organics only fault is, to create synthetics in the first place.

but this does not really matter .. even if they intended to foreshadow the conflict between synthetics and organics as the overarching plot, it was not very successful. the big reapers showing up or sending their pawns were just too obvious.

[Ieldra]

iakus wrote...

Ieldra2 wrote...

Jade8aby88 wrote...
Nice thread. But I hope the writer's interpretation was not that synthetics are fundamentally different, because given the character development of EDI and Legion. They shouldn't be.

I think there is such an underlying assumption, mainly in the perceived incapability of synthetics to feel genuine emotion. Note how post-Synthesis, we see EDI smiling and hugging Garrus. She had never smiled before and was always more detached. She showed determination in the FOB scene, but her post-Synthesis appearance was markedly different from before.

There appear to be three fundamental assumptions:
(1) Synthetics cannot feel genuine emotion, or at least have a much more limited capacity for it. See EDI; and that's why Control is considered a sacrifice by Paragon Shepard. It removes one of the defining aspects of what makes you human. The capacity for genuine emotion appears to be considered an objectively desirable trait, which means synthetics are "lesser" unless they acquire that trait.
(2) Human-like individuality is required for life to be really valid. Thus, pre-Rannoch geth are not considered equal to organics before and unless they acquire the Reaper upgrade.
(3) The Reapers represent the transcendent in good ways as well as bad ways: Reaper tech is used to bring Shepard back from the dead, and Reaper upgrades give the geth individuality.

BTW, thanks for the compliment

1) It has always been my belief that while synthetics do not feel emotions the same as organics, they have their own versions of it.  Just talking to Legion on Rannoch indicates that he did indeed feel emotions.  And over the course of the game, EDI seems to become more and more human.  By the forward base on Earth, EDI tells Shepard that she felt alive thanks lagely to Shepard's example.

2) Personally I never felt the need for everything to be human-like.  Aliens are alien.  That is neither a good or bad thing.  It's just different.  As Legion said in ME2: "No two species are identical.  All must be judged by their own merits.  Treating every species like one's own is racist.  Even benign anthropomorphism"

3) Wait, what?  Shepard was brought back with Reaper tech?  That's always been a personal theory of mine, but was that ever confirmed?

Note that I don't support these assumptions. I liked the geth when they were networked AIs because they were different, and I definitely don't think anything human-like is the final measuring stick for the validity of intelligent life. It just appears to me that much of the organic/synthetic conflict is built on those assumptions.

As for (3): It is heavily suggested by Miranda when she says she'd never worked with so many black boxes before. What could black box technology refer to but Reaper tech? Anything else would not have been beyond her understanding.

Bearbeitet von Ieldra2, 15 Dezember 2012 - 06:30 .