117 réponses à ce sujet

[Mr.House]

Eterna5 wrote...

Mr.House wrote...

Eterna5 wrote...

bleetman wrote...

wizardryforever wrote...
The motive of the Catalyst is not to kill the organics, it is to harvest and preserve them before they irreparably destroy the chance for all future organic life

Yes, preserve.

Except for all the races he just has killed because he doesn't like their genetics enough. Which, if Harbingers ranting in ME2 is anything to go by, includes basically every race this cycle.

This isn't correct. The races who genetics are considered worthy become capital ships, those who are unworthy become Destroyers. 

Humans would be made into a capital ship, Asari, Turians etc would be made into Destroyers. 

How arre they preserved? What makes them them is gone. They are now all giant ships who harvest and kill. That's not being preserved, and what about the races that are outright wiped out by the Reapers, turned into slaves or worse?

Their genetic identity is preserved. Synthesis implies that their cultures persist via their genetics but that is bull****. 

As far as I'm aware no race has been eradicated by the Reapers without being used or preserved in some way. If you have examples of some who are I'd like to see them. 

Genetic identiy? THEY ARE TURNED INTO MASSIVE STAR SHIPS THAT LOOK LIKE HARBINGER.

Also the Reapers where gonig to have the quarians wiped out by the geth, or did you forget that so you can think starbrats plans are logical and consistant?

[KaiserShep]

The notion of genetic worthiness makes it all even more of a farce.

Modifié par KaiserShep, 12 octobre 2013 - 10:50 .

[AlexMBrennan]

How arre they preserved?

It's loophole abuse - they are "preserved" by making new ships from organic goo rather than, say, petroleum we use for plastics and such.
Abusing this loophole allows it to get around the "preserve life" programming and "prune" species sufficiently advanced to be deemed a threat to all galactic life

[Display Name Owner]

wizardryforever wrote...

isnudo wrote...

TIM's plan to "extrapolate" control of Reaper Husks to actual Reapers somehow someway, is pretty silly. It doesn't even make sense. But he has indoctrination as an excuse so I might let that one go. Oh wait, he's indoctrinated because he hung a Reaper up outside his office... Hmmm...

Also the Leviathans' idea to build an AI to work out a fix for the problem of AIs always killing organics... Seems like the Council were closer to the right idea by just outlawing AIs.

But I'd say the worst goes to the United Peoples of the Milky Way's plan to beat the Reapers by banding together, combining every military asset they can muster and then throwing it all at Earth, that one planet that one species comes from that has no strategic value or value in general that would make that a meaningful plan.

Honestly, if it weren't for the fact that the Reapers moved the Citadel to Earth (not sure why they moved it there instead of elsewhere, to build their human reaper maybe?), I'd say that it was stupid too.  But since they now know that the Citadel is necessary for the Crucible to work, they have to throw everything at the Reapers in an attempt to take it back.  The fact that its at Earth doesn't mean much in terms of the story, that's more so Bioware could market the story as "take back Earth."

True, although weren't they planning to throw everything at Earth well before the Crucible or Citadel had anything to do with it? The Turians pledge support after the Genophage arc. The Salarians were the only ones who were the least bit logical about it. But yeah, I get it was all part of the Take Back Earth tagline. It makes the whole galaxy look like fools though.

[Mangalores]

Eterna5 wrote...

Mangalores wrote...

Just because BW put a wall of text and voodoo bs between their resolution and this simple conclusion doesn't change that that's essentially how they explain the whole Reaper plot away. 

No it isn't. 

Your absence of an argument blies your claim.


The eugenics proponents from the 20th century would be proud of the Reaper's thinking concerning genetics and the oil lobby proud of their application of resources.

Modifié par Mangalores, 12 octobre 2013 - 01:06 .

[wizardryforever]

KaiserShep wrote...

wizardryforever wrote...

Only it doesn't, not really.  The motive of the Catalyst is not to kill the organics, it is to harvest and preserve them before they irreparably destroy the chance for all future organic life.  The term Reaper is very apt for a number of reasons, as is the harvest that they perform.  It's like a farmer.  Do you consider the harvest of produce and livestock to be "killing?" (nevermind, I don't want to skew into another tangent with that argument)

It's more like someone who does controlled burns of forests.  Sure the undergrowth dies, but the potential for future growth remains, and the underpinnings of forest life remain in place.  In this analogy, advanced organic life is the undergrowth, primitive organic life is the trees.  It goes even further than that though, because the Reapers aren't just destroying everything, even for a discernable reason.  They collect and preserve the "essence" of the harvested species in order to essentially immortalize them.

So really the meme is a strawman, and an oversimplification at that.

Its motives don't really matter, because in the end, the effect is still the same. There's no meaningful difference between being "preserved" and being killed, because if you're melted into a homogenized goop, you are as dead as dead can be, and if you do it to an entire species, that species is now extinct. Intentions are meaningless when your actions contradict them. 

Motives matter a great deal when we are talking about how good a plan something is.  From the point of view of the races being harvested (ie, us) it seems like there is no difference at all, because our personalities as well as our physical bodies are lost.  But from the point of view of the Reapers, those things are irrelevant.  It's the genetics that they're interested in, and those they preserve quite well.  On top of that, Synthesis (the ending that everyone bashes) shows that the collected knowledge of the preserved races are also preserved, and Synthesis allows that knowledge to be shared.  So claiming that there is no difference between killing and preserving is a matter of perspective.  And since the motivations of the Reapers are quite important when examining the validity of their plan, it helps to understand their perspective.

[AlexMBrennan]

It's the genetics that they're interested in

No they are not - their goal is to make sure that viable slave races don't advance to the point where they can destroy all the potential slave races; ME2 tried to link genetics into their agenda and utterly failed (that whole "abducting humans" idea implies that the Reapers don't know about animal husbandry). Only at the last minute do genetics get mentioned again (some sort of magical new DNA framework will apparently stop us from destroying the galaxy through global thermonuclear war, making periodic culls unnecessary)

The rest is bovine excrement padding.

Modifié par AlexMBrennan, 12 octobre 2013 - 02:04 .

[Mr.House]

AlexMBrennan wrote...

How arre they preserved?

It's loophole abuse - they are "preserved" by making new ships from organic goo rather than, say, petroleum we use for plastics and such.
Abusing this loophole allows it to get around the "preserve life" programming and "prune" species sufficiently advanced to be deemed a threat to all galactic life

If this is true then why is starbrat putting them in mortal danger? If you preserve something, your goal is to make sure it's safe at all cost.

[AlexMBrennan]

You are thinking to small - if one species has to be killed off to prevent them from smashing the entire galaxy, then he'll do it because that preserves lives by preventing galaxy-wide extinction, much like a gardener pruning trees. You just don't like it because you happen to be the branch that he's going to cut off to make sure the tree as a whole continues to prosper.

[dgcatanisiri]

The Night Mammoth wrote...

wizardryforever wrote...

Only it doesn't, not really.  The motive of the Catalyst is not to kill the organics, it is to harvest and preserve them before they irreparably destroy the chance for all future organic life.  The term Reaper is very apt for a number of reasons, as is the harvest that they perform.  It's like a farmer.  Do you consider the harvest of produce and livestock to be "killing?" (nevermind, I don't want to skew into another tangent with that argument)

It's more like someone who does controlled burns of forests.  Sure the undergrowth dies, but the potential for future growth remains, and the underpinnings of forest life remain in place.  In this analogy, advanced organic life is the undergrowth, primitive organic life is the trees.  It goes even further than that though, because the Reapers aren't just destroying everything, even for a discernable reason.  They collect and preserve the "essence" of the harvested species in order to essentially immortalize them.

So really the meme is a strawman, and an oversimplification at that.

It's all well and good that the Catalyst and Reapers don't just kill for the sake of it, but the reality is completely irrelevant to anything.

They preserve some sort of genetic library of each species, but they don't do anything with it, they just keep all the data stored away inside themselves and keep the cycle going. It's like burning all the copies of a book except for a single one, and never letting anyone read it. It doesn't matter that this last copy exists. The act of preservation is meaningless. 

On top of that, Reapers don't care about the new life that advances in the wake of their genocide. A forester might burn trees away but he's doing because there's a tangible, useful result of his destructive act. Both him and the environment benefit. Does the next cycle benefit from the destruction of the previous one? No, it doesn't. 

But that's... kinda the point. Give a computer vague terms, they will still follow them to the letter. The Catalyst was told to preserve organics, to stop the conflict between organics and synthetics. That's a pretty tall order, and it doesn't say what 'preservation' is or defines 'conflict.' So that's EXACTLY what it does. The Catalyst is a highly advanced computer program, but that doesn't make it an independent AI like EDI, capable of changing its own programming - it's more like a really powerful VI. That's why it needs Shepard to make the decision - it CAN'T. EDI can choose to alter her programing. The Catalyst is incapable of that. So it will continue what it has been doing because that's what it's supposed to do, what it is programed to do.

[wizardryforever]

AlexMBrennan wrote...

It's the genetics that they're interested in

No they are not - their goal is to make sure that viable slave races don't advance to the point where they can destroy all the potential slave races; ME2 tried to link genetics into their agenda and utterly failed (that whole "abducting humans" idea implies that the Reapers don't know about animal husbandry). Only at the last minute do genetics get mentioned again (some sort of magical new DNA framework will apparently stop us from destroying the galaxy through global thermonuclear war, making periodic culls unnecessary)

The rest is bovine excrement padding.

Yeah, this makes no sense to me.  They are preserving what in Reaper form?  Goo?  Why?  Genetic material.  Seriously, don't be obtuse.  At no point does ME3 say that the Reapers use the goo for anything else, it doesn't debunk the how of the Reapers, only the why.

[AlexMBrennan]

Why? Genetic material.

That's fine as long as you don't know anything about biology; if you do know something about biology you'd either be forced to conclude that a) Bioware writers don't know anything about biology or this was supposed to be a contrived excuse to let the Reapers (who are programmed to "preserve life") kill off billions every cycle.

[The Night Mammoth]

dgcatanisiri wrote...

But that's... kinda the point. Give a computer vague terms, they will still follow them to the letter. The Catalyst was told to preserve organics, to stop the conflict between organics and synthetics. That's a pretty tall order, and it doesn't say what 'preservation' is or defines 'conflict.' So that's EXACTLY what it does. The Catalyst is a highly advanced computer program, but that doesn't make it an independent AI like EDI, capable of changing its own programming - it's more like a really powerful VI. That's why it needs Shepard to make the decision - it CAN'T. EDI can choose to alter her programing. The Catalyst is incapable of that. So it will continue what it has been doing because that's what it's supposed to do, what it is programed to do.

I'm not arguing that the Catalyst doesn't fulfill its own plan in a twisted, roundabout way, or its nature. The Catalyst doesn't care about the individual. It sees species, not people. I'd argue the plan is stupid to begin with, but that's besides the point as well.

What I'm really arguing against the idea that the Catalyst's act and idea of preservation has meaning or value, and that it's not still bad because of this, and doesn't still kill billions of people.

It preserves genetic material somehow, but so what? Preserving genetic material in a Reaper is a pointless thing to do from any perspective other than the Catalyst's. It doesn't excuse the fact that the Catalyst still kills billions of people, it doesn't stop the people that are melted down from being dead, and it doesn't benefit anyone. So why should anyone care that it preserves some information about a species when it eradicates them?

Modifié par The Night Mammoth, 13 octobre 2013 - 07:35 .

[teh DRUMPf!!]

Funny thing... for however "stupid" TIM is thought to be in ME3, he's came closer to achieving success than any other villain.


Saren was just played like a DVD. But TIM would be controllan Reapers if not for one fatal miscalculation.

[EverLastingDead]

Archer, I don't have an brother myself but the fact of hooking your only sibling who didn't want to do it in the first place, placing him in so much pain? What did you expect to happen with him and an VI, everyone would suddenly get free ice cream from an non mysterious spaceship van? Pssh... you crazy people and your assumptions.

[BronzTrooper]

Definitely Brooks. Her biggest mistake was choosing to try and take down Shepard in the middle of a galactic war with the Reapers. What would that have accomplished? There is nothing you could do as a Spectre that you couldn't get away with in the chaos of the war. It might have been more plausible had she chosen to go after Shepard before the Reapers invaded...

[teh DRUMPf!!]

KwangtungTiger wrote...

I dont think TIM really ever had a chance in controlling the Reapers. Ever sense ME: Evolution............

"Mass Effect: Evelution Spoilers Follow"

*snip*

Being hit by the Reaper artifact he's been slowly (but surely) indoctrinated sense then. I just dont see what he could have done to stop the process.

No. In my opinion, TIM was not indoctrinated in ME:E, he was not in the process of indoctrination by it, and would not have otherwise been indoctrinated if not for the implantation he gets in ME3. I know, all too well, that this is a widely-held belief. And anyone who knows me knows that I've argued against this many times.

To put it bluntly, this fanbase has a very poor understanding of the mechanics behind Reaper-indoctrination.

Rather than reposting my whole position on this, I'll just repost one of my previous debates on this: [linky].

... said debate continues into pages 3 (towards top), 10 (towards bottom), and 11.

[KwangtungTiger]

HYR 2.0 wrote...

KwangtungTiger wrote...

I dont think TIM really ever had a chance in controlling the Reapers. Ever sense ME: Evolution............

"Mass Effect: Evelution Spoilers Follow"

*snip*

Being hit by the Reaper artifact he's been slowly (but surely) indoctrinated sense then. I just dont see what he could have done to stop the process.

No. In my opinion, TIM was not indoctrinated in ME:E, he was not in the process of indoctrination by it, and would not have otherwise been indoctrinated if not for the implantation he gets in ME3. I know, all too well, that this is a widely-held belief. And anyone who knows me knows that I've argued against this many times.

To put it bluntly, this fanbase has a very poor understanding of the mechanics behind Reaper-indoctrination.

Rather than reposting my whole position on this, I'll just repost one of my previous debates on this: [linky].

... said debate continues into pages 3 (towards top), 10 (towards bottom), and 11.

I disagree and without getting to much in to it will say TIM would be the only person to have been physically changed and to have had no signs of indoctrination. Im not saying that at that moment he became indoctrinated but it is hinted at that he was hearing them in Evolution.

Shepard on the other hand is hard to believe that at the minimal some form of indoctrination hadn't taken effect (NO..........I'm not advocating the IT Theory here). He comes into so much contact with Reaper tech that it just stands to reason that some minimal affects could happen.

I respect your opinion on the matter. Its just that I believes thats all it is......your opinion. Problem is we may never know the truth. But here's to hope (ME4)