128 réponses à ce sujet

[TheCrazyHobo]

*Sigh*

No I would not choose that over what we have because that does not solve the fundamental issue that Destroy faces.

The biggest issue with Destroy is the fact that the Catalyst says cannot discriminate and it has to discriminate to murder the 4 different types of Synthetics that are killed.

Let me show you:

Husks: Nanite-enhanced slaves of the Reapers
Reapers: Based on a Organic Soup, not sure how the AI is formed, could be Organic or not.
Geth: Software based AI that is enhanced by Reaper code.
EDI: Hardware based AI that was construed using something something Reaper parts.

To destroy each of these categories, It has to discriminate. Now, I can maybe understand if they said that it would destroy Reaper based Hardware, however, how on Earth does the Crucible wave scan and eliminate a software program???

[eddieoctane]

justafan wrote...

Thematically, I believe it would have been better had the relays been destroyed. Destroy is about wiping everything Reaper away for good, relays included. To paraphrase Legion, developing along the lines the Reapers laid out blinded the galaxy from all possible alternatives.

I believe that the loss of the relays is a fair trade for destroying the reapers, and keeping the Geth alive is icing on the cake. It would be a true sacrifice, and one not felt forced on us like "it will kill all synthetic life", though I could imagine the Geth losing their upgrade in such a case, which I believe would actually be for the best.

In terms of the other endings, just keep them the way the EC made them, relays slightly damaged. I think the temptation to keep galactic society alive would more than make up for the total, yet pyrrhic, victory of destroy.

This includes FTl drives based on eezo. Humanity was experimenting with other methods of interstellar travel before discovering the Prothean outpost on Mars. Unless we begin using one of those as our new method of transportation, we are still dependant on Reaper tehnology. Destroy will always thematically fail as long as the theme is "reaper tech is bad because the devs say so".

Modifié par eddieoctane, 13 février 2013 - 07:27 .

[fiendishchicken]

I'm one of the few I guess that would rather see synthetics die to keep the Relays intact.

Not that I want to see them all die, but the means of civilization in the galaxy are the Relays. I'd rather have them be open (and not have people trapped all over the galaxy) than down for the sake of synthetics.

[NeroonWilliams]

Steelcan wrote...

NeroonWilliams wrote...
The only ending that is NOT about rejecting the cycles is Control (save the Reapers for a rainy day).  Refuse is a futile attempt to reject the cycles (it repeats itself anyway), and Synthesis is an obsolecense of the cycles.  Destroy is certainly the most anti-Reaper ending, and I think it would be fully appropriate if the Relays (built by the Reapers to ensure organic life develops along THEIR paths) were all fully removed from the galaxy as a result of its selection.

Would it be catastrophic to galactic civilization as we know it?  You bet.  Now that's what I call consequences.

. Why?  Rejecting the cycles does not mean rejecting the Reapers' technology.

As I clearly said, there are THREE CHOICES out of four that represent a rejection of the cycles.  There is ONE CHOICE which is inherently anti-Reaper.  Destroy is about rejecting the Reapers, and the destruction of all of the Reaper infrastructure is a perfectly logical consequence of this choice.  Please notice that there is a difference between the infrastructure that the races of the galaxy know how to use (but not how to build), and things like communications relays and ships drives (and intelligences like EDI and the Geth) that were built by the individual races and organizations of the galaxy based on a limited understanding of the tech involved in the Relays.  Your above response is akin to the Turian councilor in ME2 (and just as disrespectful as my throwing THAT back at you).

Unless you are actually arguing for a happy ending, where you have no significant consequences to your galaxy shaking decision.  In which case, I think we would have an even bigger deus ex machina on our hands than we had before, since that is the original purpose (a reset button to clean up the mess the mortals have made) of such a device.

Modifié par NeroonWilliams, 13 février 2013 - 07:42 .

[Fawx9]

NeroonWilliams wrote...

Steelcan wrote...

NeroonWilliams wrote...
The only ending that is NOT about rejecting the cycles is Control (save the Reapers for a rainy day).  Refuse is a futile attempt to reject the cycles (it repeats itself anyway), and Synthesis is an obsolecense of the cycles.  Destroy is certainly the most anti-Reaper ending, and I think it would be fully appropriate if the Relays (built by the Reapers to ensure organic life develops along THEIR paths) were all fully removed from the galaxy as a result of its selection.

Would it be catastrophic to galactic civilization as we know it?  You bet.  Now that's what I call consequences.

. Why?  Rejecting the cycles does not mean rejecting the Reapers' technology.

As I clearly said, there are THREE CHOICES out of four that represent a rejection of the cycles.  There is ONE CHOICE which is inherently anti-Reaper.  Destroy is about rejecting the Reapers, and the destruction of all of the Reaper infrastructure is a perfectly logical consequence of this choice.  Please notice that there is a difference between the infrastructure that the races of the galaxy know how to use (but not how to build), and things like communications relays and ships drives (and intelligences like EDI and the Geth) that were built by the individual races and organizations of the galaxy based on a limited understanding of the tech involved in the Relays.  Your above response is akin to the Turian councilor in ME2 (and just as disrespectful as my throwing THAT back at you).

Unless you are actually arguing for a happy ending, where you have no significant consequences to your galaxy shaking decision.  In which case, I think we would have an even bigger deus ex machina on our hands than we had before, since that is the original purpose (a reset button to clean up the mess the mortals have made) of such a device.

No its not. That's like saying slaves would destory all the roads/railroads a regime layed down because they overthrew them.

It makes no sense and is pointless since they'll just rebuild them anyways.

[justafan]

eddieoctane wrote...

justafan wrote...

Thematically, I believe it would have been better had the relays been destroyed. Destroy is about wiping everything Reaper away for good, relays included. To paraphrase Legion, developing along the lines the Reapers laid out blinded the galaxy from all possible alternatives.

I believe that the loss of the relays is a fair trade for destroying the reapers, and keeping the Geth alive is icing on the cake. It would be a true sacrifice, and one not felt forced on us like "it will kill all synthetic life", though I could imagine the Geth losing their upgrade in such a case, which I believe would actually be for the best.

In terms of the other endings, just keep them the way the EC made them, relays slightly damaged. I think the temptation to keep galactic society alive would more than make up for the total, yet pyrrhic, victory of destroy.

This includes FTl drives based on eezo. Humanity was experimenting with other methods of interstellar travel before discovering the Prothean outpost on Mars. Unless we begin using one of those as our new method of transportation, we are still dependant on Reaper tehnology. Destroy will always thematically fail as long as the theme is "reaper tech is bad because the devs say so".

The Reapers neither made those ships nor the eezo that powers them, there are just safety protocols that somehow got adopted in bulk.  The Relays and the Citadel however were both made by reaper tentacles, so it would make sense for both to be destroyed as well.

[Iakus]

Fawx9 wrote...

No its not. That's like saying slaves would destory all the roads/railroads a regime layed down because they overthrew them.

It makes no sense and is pointless since they'll just rebuild them anyways.

More like they used the railroads to overthrow them, and in so doing, wrecked them.

But they can rebuild those railroads once they understand how

[eddieoctane]

justafan wrote...

The Reapers neither made those ships nor the eezo that powers them, there are just safety protocols that somehow got adopted in bulk.  The Relays and the Citadel however were both made by reaper tentacles, so it would make sense for both to be destroyed as well.

"Modern" FTL is derived from Prothean artifacts, which were derived from the Insuannon, which were based of a previous civilization almost ad infinitum.

We also know that the Reapers intentionally leave just enough technology behind to serve as bread crumbs to the technological path that the Catalyst wants organics to develop along.

When you take both of those facts into consideration, it seems highly likely that mass effect technology ultimately derived from the Reapers, thus render all mass effect technology just as dangerous to galactic civilization as the relays and Citadel and should likewise be cast aside. I'm simply extending the writers' logic to everything the Reapers left behind for us to find. Thus we see the rpoblem in pickign which pieces of Reaper hardware are bad and which are not.

Modifié par eddieoctane, 13 février 2013 - 08:04 .

[NeroonWilliams]

eddieoctane wrote...

justafan wrote...

Thematically, I believe it would have been better had the relays been destroyed. Destroy is about wiping everything Reaper away for good, relays included. To paraphrase Legion, developing along the lines the Reapers laid out blinded the galaxy from all possible alternatives.

I believe that the loss of the relays is a fair trade for destroying the reapers, and keeping the Geth alive is icing on the cake. It would be a true sacrifice, and one not felt forced on us like "it will kill all synthetic life", though I could imagine the Geth losing their upgrade in such a case, which I believe would actually be for the best.

In terms of the other endings, just keep them the way the EC made them, relays slightly damaged. I think the temptation to keep galactic society alive would more than make up for the total, yet pyrrhic, victory of destroy.

This includes FTl drives based on eezo. Humanity was experimenting with other methods of interstellar travel before discovering the Prothean outpost on Mars. Unless we begin using one of those as our new method of transportation, we are still dependant on Reaper tehnology. Destroy will always thematically fail as long as the theme is "reaper tech is bad because the devs say so".

The Reapers didn't invent eezo, they invented the Relays, which the galaxy as a whole still don't fully understand (they're certainly clueless about the Citadel).  That is a big part of the developmental trap that the Relays represent.  Rather than developing and building our own Relays that we have complete control over, we rely on existing tech that ultimately is controlled by a force able to cut us off from them (or at least once was able to).

If humans had had access to eezo before discovering the Relay and the Prothean Archives, you can bet they would have been experimenting with it to achieve FTL travel, since it clearly has better potential.  I can't imagine that the Asari (biotic from birth, and with eezo deposits on Thessia) had to wait until discovering their system's Relay to begin using eezo in ships drives.  They probably never even used fossil fuels for transport on the surface of Thessia before leaving for space.

Eezo doesn't seem all that difficult to USE.  It's just damn hard to FIND.  I'd guess THAT is another part of the Relay trap.  Most of the eezo in the galaxy is already tied up in the infrastructure of the Relays; removed from circulation before the younger civilizations can find it and harness it in their own way.

[Fawx9]

iakus wrote...

Fawx9 wrote...

No its not. That's like saying slaves would destory all the roads/railroads a regime layed down because they overthrew them.

It makes no sense and is pointless since they'll just rebuild them anyways.

More like they used the railroads to overthrow them, and in so doing, wrecked them.

But they can rebuild those railroads once they understand how

In which case you're not destorying them because they are reaper tech and thematic reason.

[Iakus]

Fawx9 wrote...

In which case you're not destorying them because they are reaper tech and thematic reason.

Like I said, I find the symmetry appealing, using the Reaper's own trap against them.

And then having to learn the technology for ourselves, thus developing along our own paths.  Destroying the relays would snap the galaxy out of their collective apathy.

[eddieoctane]

NeroonWilliams wrote...

The Reapers didn't invent eezo, they invented the Relays, which the galaxy as a whole still don't fully understand (they're certainly clueless about the Citadel).  That is a big part of the developmental trap that the Relays represent.  Rather than developing and building our own Relays that we have complete control over, we rely on existing tech that ultimately is controlled by a force able to cut us off from them (or at least once was able to).

The Reapers didn't invent eezo, just like the Third Reich didn't invent oxidation. But Germany did come up with the first jet engines, and we use them today regardless of their nefarious origins. And as I just pointed out, the Reapers intentionally left technology behind for younger races to find. The Protheans got eezo-based tech from another race, who got it from another race, and it's not much of an assumption to say that the Reapers left the frist mass effect relics to be found after they started the harvest.

Also, the Asari's evolution was jump-started by the Protheans. We can't make conclusions about how they would have developed technologically as there was alien interference on the culture from the start.

Modifié par eddieoctane, 13 février 2013 - 08:17 .

[Volc19]

Actually, back when we read the leaks and didn't know the Geth were on the chopping block, and thought the relays were the price for dead Reapers while Synthesis and Control left them intact, I supported Destroy. Better the galaxy find it's own path instead of using the gifts of the Reapers.

However, this was also before I knew that a massive chunk of every species' military would be orbiting Earth, and would be stranded for quite some time.

[NeroonWilliams]

Fawx9 wrote...

NeroonWilliams wrote...

There are THREE CHOICES out of four that represent a rejection of the cycles.  There is ONE CHOICE which is inherently anti-Reaper.  Destroy is about rejecting the Reapers, and the destruction of all of the Reaper infrastructure is a perfectly logical consequence of this choice.  Please notice that there is a difference between the infrastructure that the races of the galaxy know how to use (but not how to build), and things like communications relays and ships drives (and intelligences like EDI and the Geth) that were built by the individual races and organizations of the galaxy based on a limited understanding of the tech involved in the Relays.  Your above response is akin to the Turian councilor in ME2 (and just as disrespectful as my throwing THAT back at you).

Unless you are actually arguing for a happy ending, where you have no significant consequences to your galaxy shaking decision.  In which case, I think we would have an even bigger deus ex machina on our hands than we had before, since that is the original purpose (a reset button to clean up the mess the mortals have made) of such a device.

No its not. That's like saying slaves would destory all the roads/railroads a regime layed down because they overthrew them.

It makes no sense and is pointless since they'll just rebuild them anyways.

What I was stating is not the same as the allusion you have drawn.  The difference lies in the cause and effect.  Instead of the slaves in your example destroying the roads and rails because they didn't like that their overlords built them, it's more like the slaves destroyed the roads and rails as a part of the plan to overthrow their oppressors.  Historically this is actually a common tactic in guerilla warfare: destroying the infrastructure of the technologically superior force evens the playing field toward the technologically inferior one.

As to the second statement, if the slaves don't know HOW to rebuild the roads and the rails, it will take an awfully long time to rebuild them, won't it?

[justafan]

eddieoctane wrote...

justafan wrote...

The Reapers neither made those ships nor the eezo that powers them, there are just safety protocols that somehow got adopted in bulk.  The Relays and the Citadel however were both made by reaper tentacles, so it would make sense for both to be destroyed as well.

"Modern" FTL is derived from Prothean artifacts, which were derived from the Insuannon, which were based of a previous civilization almost ad infinitum.

We also know that the Reapers intentionally leave just enough technology behind to serve as bread crumbs to the technological path that the Catalyst wants organics to develop along.

When you take both of those facts into consideration, it seems highly likely that mass effect technology ultimately derived from the Reapers, thus render all mass effect technology just as dangerous to galactic civilization as the relays and Citadel and should likewise be cast aside. I'm simply extending the writers' logic to everything the Reapers left behind for us to find. Thus we see the rpoblem in pickign which pieces of Reaper hardware are bad and which are not.

I will have to disagree with you.  There may be a common origin for all these techs, but only the relays are in their original state as the reapers made them.  The galaxy at large has been using FTL drives for millenia, and in that time they have designed their own systems and made many additions and subtractions over the years so that you couldn't blanket them "reaper" tech.  Take the Tantalus drive, designed by humans and Turians as a stealth drive, no reaper involvement there.

[eddieoctane]

NeroonWilliams wrote...


What I was stating is not the same as the allusion you have drawn.  The difference lies in the cause and effect.  Instead of the slaves in your example destroying the roads and rails because they didn't like that their overlords built them, it's more like the slaves destroyed the roads and rails as a part of the plan to overthrow their oppressors.  Historically this is actually a common tactic in guerilla warfare: destroying the infrastructure of the technologically superior force evens the playing field toward the technologically inferior one.

As to the second statement, if the slaves don't know HOW to rebuild the roads and the rails, it will take an awfully long time to rebuild them, won't it?

Actually, what happened in the game is not what either of you said. The relays are destroyed as a consequence of killing the Reapers, and an unintended one at that. It's like if the slaves overthrow their masters and all roads and bridges suddenly disappear with no slaves having the ability to reconstruct them. Doesn't make much sense, but it's what actually happened int he game.

[eddieoctane]

justafan wrote...

eddieoctane wrote...

justafan wrote...

The Reapers neither made those ships nor the eezo that powers them, there are just safety protocols that somehow got adopted in bulk.  The Relays and the Citadel however were both made by reaper tentacles, so it would make sense for both to be destroyed as well.

"Modern" FTL is derived from Prothean artifacts, which were derived from the Insuannon, which were based of a previous civilization almost ad infinitum.

We also know that the Reapers intentionally leave just enough technology behind to serve as bread crumbs to the technological path that the Catalyst wants organics to develop along.

When you take both of those facts into consideration, it seems highly likely that mass effect technology ultimately derived from the Reapers, thus render all mass effect technology just as dangerous to galactic civilization as the relays and Citadel and should likewise be cast aside. I'm simply extending the writers' logic to everything the Reapers left behind for us to find. Thus we see the rpoblem in pickign which pieces of Reaper hardware are bad and which are not.

I will have to disagree with you.  There may be a common origin for all these techs, but only the relays are in their original state as the reapers made them.  The galaxy at large has been using FTL drives for millenia, and in that time they have designed their own systems and made many additions and subtractions over the years so that you couldn't blanket them "reaper" tech.  Take the Tantalus drive, designed by humans and Turians as a stealth drive, no reaper involvement there.

By your logic, the comm buoys should remain intact since organics built them, despite being little more than shrunk down relays that only open a passage big enough for a tight-beam comm signal to pass through. With the comm relays intact, galactic communication is still possible and the impact of destroying the relays is mitigated to a large extent. Part of the "galactic dark age" wasn't just the slow down in travel, but also communication. But if the relays and comm buoys go, why not other tech the was ultimately derived from what the Reapers deigned we should have as part of their control scheme? Do you see why the writers' logic breaks down?

[NeroonWilliams]

eddieoctane wrote...

NeroonWilliams wrote...

The Reapers didn't invent eezo, they invented the Relays, which the galaxy as a whole still don't fully understand (they're certainly clueless about the Citadel).  That is a big part of the developmental trap that the Relays represent.  Rather than developing and building our own Relays that we have complete control over, we rely on existing tech that ultimately is controlled by a force able to cut us off from them (or at least once was able to).

The Reapers didn't invent eezo, just like the Third Reich didn't invent oxidation. But Germany did come up with the first jet engines, and we use them today regardless of their nefarious origins. And as I just pointed out, the Reapers intentionally left technology behind for younger races to find. The Protheans got eezo-based tech from another race, who got it from another race, and it's not much of an assumption to say that the Reapers left the frist mass effect relics to be found after they started the harvest.

Also, the Asari's evolution was jump-started by the Protheans. We can't make conclusions about how they would have developed technologically as there was alien interference on the culture from the start.

Don't think I didn't notice that you dismissed the claim about humans developing eezo based travel if they had access to eezo.  It's clearly a better way to do it and an easier way to do it.  And it could be developed without the crutch of fallen civilizations.  One of the Reapers' goals was to shorten the cycles.  So yes, that happened.

At any rate, we've both gone afield from the discussion which is that the destruction of the Relays by the Crucible makes sense both thematically as well as logically, and therefore would serve as an alternate counterweight to the other choices in lieu of the destruction of EDI and the Geth.

[NeroonWilliams]

eddieoctane wrote...

NeroonWilliams wrote...


What I was stating is not the same as the allusion you have drawn.  The difference lies in the cause and effect.  Instead of the slaves in your example destroying the roads and rails because they didn't like that their overlords built them, it's more like the slaves destroyed the roads and rails as a part of the plan to overthrow their oppressors.  Historically this is actually a common tactic in guerilla warfare: destroying the infrastructure of the technologically superior force evens the playing field toward the technologically inferior one.

As to the second statement, if the slaves don't know HOW to rebuild the roads and the rails, it will take an awfully long time to rebuild them, won't it?

Actually, what happened in the game is not what either of you said. The relays are destroyed as a consequence of killing the Reapers, and an unintended one at that. It's like if the slaves overthrow their masters and all roads and bridges suddenly disappear with no slaves having the ability to reconstruct them. Doesn't make much sense, but it's what actually happened int he game.

On that Eddie, we can certainly agree.  Hence the "more like".  I probably shouldn't have brought up the historical record since that made you think that's what I was referring to.  I stand by the rest of the statement though.  Planned or not, the destruction of the Relays was a part of destroying the Reapers.

[justafan]

eddieoctane wrote...

justafan wrote...

eddieoctane wrote...

justafan wrote...

The Reapers neither made those ships nor the eezo that powers them, there are just safety protocols that somehow got adopted in bulk.  The Relays and the Citadel however were both made by reaper tentacles, so it would make sense for both to be destroyed as well.

"Modern" FTL is derived from Prothean artifacts, which were derived from the Insuannon, which were based of a previous civilization almost ad infinitum.

We also know that the Reapers intentionally leave just enough technology behind to serve as bread crumbs to the technological path that the Catalyst wants organics to develop along.

When you take both of those facts into consideration, it seems highly likely that mass effect technology ultimately derived from the Reapers, thus render all mass effect technology just as dangerous to galactic civilization as the relays and Citadel and should likewise be cast aside. I'm simply extending the writers' logic to everything the Reapers left behind for us to find. Thus we see the rpoblem in pickign which pieces of Reaper hardware are bad and which are not.

I will have to disagree with you.  There may be a common origin for all these techs, but only the relays are in their original state as the reapers made them.  The galaxy at large has been using FTL drives for millenia, and in that time they have designed their own systems and made many additions and subtractions over the years so that you couldn't blanket them "reaper" tech.  Take the Tantalus drive, designed by humans and Turians as a stealth drive, no reaper involvement there.

By your logic, the comm buoys should remain intact since organics built them, despite being little more than shrunk down relays that only open a passage big enough for a tight-beam comm signal to pass through. With the comm relays intact, galactic communication is still possible and the impact of destroying the relays is mitigated to a large extent. Part of the "galactic dark age" wasn't just the slow down in travel, but also communication. But if the relays and comm buoys go, why not other tech the was ultimately derived from what the Reapers deigned we should have as part of their control scheme? Do you see why the writers' logic breaks down?

Where is this information about comm buoys coming from?  I'm fairly well versed in the lore but the buoys are barely ever mentioned.  The buoys were never shown to be destroyed, they were never shown period, we have no idea if they survived the blast or not, let alone how they were built.  The ending was Super Vague on what happened other than the Reapers, relays and citadel crashing/blowing up.  Not that it matters in the buoys case, since I thought they used the relays themseves to transmit messages, and they were not independent machines.

Anything organic made has a clear distinction from reaper tech.  They made their own adjustments, programming, designs, etc.  Everything reaper hasn't changed in millions of years, hence why Destroy could target them independently from organic creations.  Anyways, not even the relays are truly "destroyed", they aren't incinerated, meaning that the wave is most likely targetting inside the reapers and relays, lets say a theoretical "reaper code".  In this case, all reaper tech is permanently broken, but organic creations are free from the blast.

Modifié par justafan, 13 février 2013 - 08:51 .

[wright1978]

Ieldra2 wrote...

Well, that was EC Destroy. As I said, EC High EMS Destroy is thematically compromised. It removed the main downside of the Destroy ending, keeping the thematically less significant death of the synthetics instead. To discuss the opinion that this should not have happened, that the relays should've been destroyed, not necessarily the synthetics, is the point of this thread.

BTW, this is based on the acknowledgement of the claim that the Reapers and their technology were more thematically significant to the story than the organic/synthetic conflict. I think most would agree with this.

Disagree completely. High EMS EC destroy is thematically intact as far as i'mn concerned. It is about rejecting the cycle and reaper life as evidenced by Reapers, husks, The geth(unfortunately since you can't avoid them choosing reaper upgrades and EDI). It is thematically in tact. It is not about destroying the reaper created relays and never should have been. Them being fixed and used is necessary Taking and using creations of other civilisations is perfectly natural.

[eddieoctane]

NeroonWilliams wrote...

Don't think I didn't notice that you dismissed the claim about humans developing eezo based travel if they had access to eezo.  It's clearly a better way to do it and an easier way to do it.  And it could be developed without the crutch of fallen civilizations.  One of the Reapers' goals was to shorten the cycles.  So yes, that happened.

At any rate, we've both gone afield from the discussion which is that the destruction of the Relays by the Crucible makes sense both thematically as well as logically, and therefore would serve as an alternate counterweight to the other choices in lieu of the destruction of EDI and the Geth.

I didn't mean to dismiss the point about humans and eezo. But when we talk about how tings would happen "naturally", we need to look at things in a vacuum, hence why the Asari and eezo is irrelevant thanks to their hidden Prothean beacon. Given the lack of eezo resources beside the Mars stockpile, I doubt humanity would have ever found any to experiment with. We can't know how long it takes to develop new eezo-based technology. It's not that the stuff is particularly easy to work with, just that the tech is fairly easy to replicate. Starting form scratch is a different story entirely.

In the end, humans didn't have eezo, were developing other technologies, and abandoned everything once having acquired a functional FTL from the Protheans, who go it from...we've been down that road before. Sovereign's dialog on Vermire strongly implies that while other FTL technologies are possible, the Reapers want us dependent on eezo-based systems.

You're right about getting off the original discussion a bit. The destruction of the Geth could be thematically acceptable if the sacrifice gained us something tangible and operated in a logical way, but it does not. I don't think the freedom from the Reapers influence as implied by destroying the relays is possible as I explained previously. The impact of even a single cycle can't be undone and forever alters the galaxy. It's a false premise to think blowing up our primary method of travel will somehow accomplish anything. That covers the lack benefit to the sacrifice, but that's only one part of the issue with destroy being poorly implemented as is. Next quote gets to the inconsistencies with destroy, though it does tie back to the thematic relevance a bit as well.

justafan wrote...

Where is this information about comm
buoys coming from?  I'm fairly well versed in the lore but the buoys are
barely ever mentioned.  The buoys were never shown to be destroyed,
they were never shown period, we have no idea if they survived the blast
or not, let alone how they were built.  The ending was Super Vague on
what happened other than the Reapers, relays and citadel
crashing/blowing up.  Not that it matters in the buoys case, since I
thought they used the relays themseves to transmit messages, and they
were not independent machines.

Anything organic made has a clear
distinction from reaper tech.  They made their own adjustments,
programming, designs, etc.  Everything reaper hasn't changed in millions
of years, hence why Destroy could target them independently from
organic creations.  Anyways, not even the relays are truly "destroyed",
they aren't incinerated, meaning that the wave is most likely targetting
inside the reapers and relays, lets say a theoretical "reaper
code".  In this case, all reaper tech is permanently broken, but organic
creations are free from the blast.

Where? The codex. http://masseffect.wi...#Communications

"The buoys are little more than a cluster of primitive, miniature mass relays".

If the comm buoys are built by organics and thus immune to the red space magic, then large regions of the galaxy still have instantaneous communications within said regions. This would limit the thematic impact of a galactic dark age. If we still have internet but suddenly don't have jets, things aren't going to change as much as they would if we suddenly didn't have electricity or running water, which is what the pre-EC destroy implied.

If the buoys go up in smoke, however, I have to wonder what other organic-built tech would also bit the big one. If there is a threshold of "Reaper-ishness" in a given piece of tech for it to be taken down, what's the limit? Is the destroy wave selectively targeting only certain pieces of tech? The Geth go down because of Reaper code alone, yet rip offs of the relays could somehow survive is mind boggling. But if the Geth are ruined because they are not organics, what happens to all VIs running critical systems across the galaxy like nuclear power plants or life support on ships?

In the end, these questions poke a lot of holes in the ending's logic and are the writers' fault. I thought synthesis was terrible because of the complete ass-pull of making everyone self-modifying cyborgs via a wave of green radiation, but destroy doesn't operate any better. It's sad when the most logical of the three endings (since most agree that refuse is just a big middle finger to people who wanted to shoot the catalyst because the little brat deserved it) is the one that leaves the Reapers intact and likely to begin things again as soon as Shep gets bored. It would appear that we are destined to lose if we think about the game at all.

[wright1978]

Fawx9 wrote...

NeroonWilliams wrote...

Steelcan wrote...

NeroonWilliams wrote...
The only ending that is NOT about rejecting the cycles is Control (save the Reapers for a rainy day).  Refuse is a futile attempt to reject the cycles (it repeats itself anyway), and Synthesis is an obsolecense of the cycles.  Destroy is certainly the most anti-Reaper ending, and I think it would be fully appropriate if the Relays (built by the Reapers to ensure organic life develops along THEIR paths) were all fully removed from the galaxy as a result of its selection.

Would it be catastrophic to galactic civilization as we know it?  You bet.  Now that's what I call consequences.

. Why?  Rejecting the cycles does not mean rejecting the Reapers' technology.

As I clearly said, there are THREE CHOICES out of four that represent a rejection of the cycles.  There is ONE CHOICE which is inherently anti-Reaper.  Destroy is about rejecting the Reapers, and the destruction of all of the Reaper infrastructure is a perfectly logical consequence of this choice.  Please notice that there is a difference between the infrastructure that the races of the galaxy know how to use (but not how to build), and things like communications relays and ships drives (and intelligences like EDI and the Geth) that were built by the individual races and organizations of the galaxy based on a limited understanding of the tech involved in the Relays.  Your above response is akin to the Turian councilor in ME2 (and just as disrespectful as my throwing THAT back at you).

Unless you are actually arguing for a happy ending, where you have no significant consequences to your galaxy shaking decision.  In which case, I think we would have an even bigger deus ex machina on our hands than we had before, since that is the original purpose (a reset button to clean up the mess the mortals have made) of such a device.

No its not. That's like saying slaves would destory all the roads/railroads a regime layed down because they overthrew them.

It makes no sense and is pointless since they'll just rebuild them anyways.

Agree completely. Destruction of infrastructure is in no way a logical consequence of overthrowing the reapers. Civilisations are built on the backs of other civilisations. We don't and shouldn't have to start from scratch.

[Femlob]

TheCrazyHobo wrote...

The biggest issue with Destroy is the fact that the Catalyst says cannot discriminate and it has to discriminate to murder the 4 different types of Synthetics that are killed.

Catalyst runs on Windows 95.

Bill Gates did 9/11 Destroy.

[The Night Mammoth]

Yes, at least then it would have a semblance of consistency with its intention, as opposed to a hugely contradictory one.