123 réponses à ce sujet

[sH0tgUn jUliA]

iakus wrote...

themikefest wrote...

iakus wrote...

There are Destroy slides for Miranda.  A bug keepsthe nonromanced one from firing in most cases

Can that be said about Jack as well?  I've never seen her in a slide when I pick destroy.

Yes, it's for both Miranda and Jack.

Edit:  specifically nonromanced Miranda and Jack

I've seen Jack in destroy standing at the Cemetary, I've not seen the one for Miranda, however. 

[themikefest]

@sH0tgUn jUliA I like your Marmalade Theory

The Leviathans are like politicians. They have all this power and think everything they do is right no matter what

One thing that bothers me is if previous species are preserved in reaper form, why are the reapers put in harms way when harvesting? If that reaper is destroyed whatever knowledge it had of that particular species is lost forever(not that is was already)

[Sir DeLoria]

I wouldn't care, I never spare the Geth anyway and I don't care about EDI.

[sH0tgUn jUliA]

@ themikefest: It's like dropping a jar of jam on the floor. Oh well.

But you know what bothers me more about the whole thing? How many Reapers we snuffed. It says they build one capital reaper per cycle. I counted something in the neighborhood of 9 capital reapers during the game. One would think that the other cycles would have scored a few hits on them as well. This tells me two things.

1) This "reaper form" the Catalyst talks about is also based on a ship that looks like the capital ship. Logic would indicate that the "Intelligence" had thousands of them to begin with. They were called "Reapers," but they were not "true Reapers." They lacked the marmalade. They had a basic VI controlling them or something like that otherwise, how did it harvest the Leviathans?

2) It tells me that the harvest was not sustainable. If the Reapers lost more than one capital ship per cycle, they lost ground. So to counter this argument, I think it was either Weekes or Gamble who said at a conference that the Reapers never lost a single ship until this cycle. Hearing that made me bust out laughing. A cycle as advanced as the Protheans never knocked out a single ship of any kind, and Commander Shepard takes down one on foot. Simply Amazing!

Fact: the reapers were a stupid idea.

[RogueBot]

Without the deaths of Edi and the Geth, destroy would be a no-brainer, which is why their deaths were included.

On the one hand, it's impressive that Bioware could make you care so much about them that "killing the Reapers" is a tough choice, but on the other hand, it was so obviously contrived that it has very little emotional impact. It's really an excellent case in point of how much better Bioware is at writing characters than overall storylines.

Modifié par RogueBot, 21 février 2014 - 11:41 .

[RangerSG]

sH0tgUn jUliA wrote...

@ themikefest: It's like dropping a jar of jam on the floor. Oh well.

But you know what bothers me more about the whole thing? How many Reapers we snuffed. It says they build one capital reaper per cycle. I counted something in the neighborhood of 9 capital reapers during the game. One would think that the other cycles would have scored a few hits on them as well. This tells me two things.

1) This "reaper form" the Catalyst talks about is also based on a ship that looks like the capital ship. Logic would indicate that the "Intelligence" had thousands of them to begin with. They were called "Reapers," but they were not "true Reapers." They lacked the marmalade. They had a basic VI controlling them or something like that otherwise, how did it harvest the Leviathans?

2) It tells me that the harvest was not sustainable. If the Reapers lost more than one capital ship per cycle, they lost ground. So to counter this argument, I think it was either Weekes or Gamble who said at a conference that the Reapers never lost a single ship until this cycle. Hearing that made me bust out laughing. A cycle as advanced as the Protheans never knocked out a single ship of any kind, and Commander Shepard takes down one on foot. Simply Amazing!

Fact: the reapers were a stupid idea.

No, the Reapers weren't a stupid idea. The idea that they had to have the uploaded consciousnesses inside them was a bad idea. The idea of super AIs killing us is always good for a few chills. It was the execution that lacked. 

[Iakus]

RogueBot wrote...

Without the deaths of Edi and the Geth, destroy would be a no-brainer, which is why their deaths were included.

On the one hand, it's impressive that Bioware could make you care so much about them that "killing the Reapers" is a tough choice, but on the other hand, it was so obviously contrived that it has very little emotional impact. It's really an excellent case in point of how much better Bioware is at writing characters than overall storylines.

Oh, it has "emotional impact"

The problem is that impact is "why is Bioware jerking us around like that?"

[ImaginaryMatter]

sH0tgUn jUliA wrote...

You have described Marmalade Theory.

This is exactly how I see the Reapers. They harvest advanced organic life like we harvest berries and make a goop out of them and pump their remains into a shell that resembles their race. This goop has no consciousness. If it did, why would it immediately try to kill those out of whom it was made? No. The consciousness is some sort of advanced VI that is fully obedient to the Catalyst and tied to its control signal. What is in the shell is simply a genetic catalog of the race and nothing more.... until we activate the synthesis ending and it becomes partly synthetic and can interface with the VI program. 

"We preserve advanced organic life in Reaper form."

Inusannon Preserves
Leviathan Preserves
and now they try for Human Preserves....

But who made the Crucible? You would not know them and there isn't time to explain. ... but you control the reapers. You can make them stop for a little bit, can't you? 

I can, but I won't. I'm having too much fun and you're interrupting me. Let's ge on with this. The Crucible changed me. Opened new possibilities, but I can't make them happen.

But I can?

Yes.

...... stupid Leviathans.

That's reassuring.

[Massa FX]

I'm confused. BW employees saying no Reaper had been destroyed prior to this cycle?

What?

Leviathan of Dis? Derelict dead (but dreaming) Reaper?

Did I imagine these things?

[RangerSG]

Massa FX wrote...

I'm confused. BW employees saying no Reaper had been destroyed prior to this cycle?

What?

Leviathan of Dis? Derelict dead (but dreaming) Reaper?

Did I imagine these things?

Off the cuff remarks can be in error. One more reason why a lore continuity staffer would be a good idea. 

[ImaginaryMatter]

RangerSG wrote...

Massa FX wrote...

I'm confused. BW employees saying no Reaper had been destroyed prior to this cycle?

What?

Leviathan of Dis? Derelict dead (but dreaming) Reaper?

Did I imagine these things?

Off the cuff remarks can be in error. One more reason why a lore continuity staffer would be a good idea. 

Yes, that would be a great person to add to the team.

[Undead Han]

themikefest wrote...

destroy all the time every time no matter what.

[sH0tgUn jUliA]

RogueBot wrote...

Without the deaths of Edi and the Geth, destroy would be a no-brainer, which is why their deaths were included.

On the one hand, it's impressive that Bioware could make you care so much about them that "killing the Reapers" is a tough choice, but on the other hand, it was so obviously contrived that it has very little emotional impact. It's really an excellent case in point of how much better Bioware is at writing characters than overall storylines.

This is why if you want to destroy the reapers, the solution to the problem is to destroy the Geth on Rannoch. Just make sure you destroyed the Heretic base so that the Quarian fleet is larger. You don't need the war assets especially if you have Omega. This way it's only EDI at the end. I have more feels for EDI than I do for the Geth. One death is a tragedy. The Geth? A statistic.

[shodiswe]

sH0tgUn jUliA wrote...

@ themikefest: It's like dropping a jar of jam on the floor. Oh well.

But you know what bothers me more about the whole thing? How many Reapers we snuffed. It says they build one capital reaper per cycle. I counted something in the neighborhood of 9 capital reapers during the game. One would think that the other cycles would have scored a few hits on them as well. This tells me two things.

1) This "reaper form" the Catalyst talks about is also based on a ship that looks like the capital ship. Logic would indicate that the "Intelligence" had thousands of them to begin with. They were called "Reapers," but they were not "true Reapers." They lacked the marmalade. They had a basic VI controlling them or something like that otherwise, how did it harvest the Leviathans?

2) It tells me that the harvest was not sustainable. If the Reapers lost more than one capital ship per cycle, they lost ground. So to counter this argument, I think it was either Weekes or Gamble who said at a conference that the Reapers never lost a single ship until this cycle. Hearing that made me bust out laughing. A cycle as advanced as the Protheans never knocked out a single ship of any kind, and Commander Shepard takes down one on foot. Simply Amazing!

Fact: the reapers were a stupid idea.

My guess is that it harvested the Leviathan crew onboard the Citadel. Which would be a Leviathan Science vessel. It was probably enough to create Harbinger.

We don't know how many Leviathans are still out there. But it looks liek the Reapers can't touch them.

The Reapers only sent one ship to probe their defences, they could have sent a thousand dreadnaughts.
I don't think the Catalyst can destroy the Leviathans, or it would have done so a billion years ago.

When you meet the Catalyst on the Citadel it laments their passive nature, they are part of the problem but they didn't get involved until Shepard involved them.

Even at that point they are barely trying. The Leviathans didn't send any ships or real resources, all they gave was "orbs" for remote controling Reapers..... As many as the "lesser species" feelt comfortable to use.

The people who used it kind of got enslaved by the Leviathans. In Short, the Leviathans didn't want to waste more than a few trinkets.... They probably let their kids play around with the husks.. They might have made a killing on the revenues of their new game!

Reaper posession online! Buy it now! PG 2000! Not suitable for young Leviathans!

You can also see the Reapers that are snaking about outside the Leviathan controled facility. They wern't in a hurry to attack. The Catalyst is more intent on gathering intel on the Leviathans and what they are up to than actualy trying to take them on in a full scale war.

The Catalyst has likely got a digital copy of every Reaper ship ever created, so it isn't that concerned about their destruction. It is the combined inteligence of all Reapers ever created, as long as the job gets done it's "satisfied".

[Bob from Accounting]

sH0tgUn jUliA wrote...

@ themikefest: It's like dropping a jar of jam on the floor. Oh well.

But you know what bothers me more about the whole thing? How many Reapers we snuffed. It says they build one capital reaper per cycle. I counted something in the neighborhood of 9 capital reapers during the game. One would think that the other cycles would have scored a few hits on them as well. This tells me two things.

2) It tells me that the harvest was not sustainable. If the Reapers lost more than one capital ship per cycle, they lost ground. So to counter this argument, I think it was either Weekes or Gamble who said at a conference that the Reapers never lost a single ship until this cycle. Hearing that made me bust out laughing. A cycle as advanced as the Protheans never knocked out a single ship of any kind, and Commander Shepard takes down one on foot. Simply Amazing!

Fact: the reapers were a stupid idea.

Have you considered the possibility that the Reapers could rebuild themselves from a template?

[shodiswe]

Bob from Accounting wrote...

sH0tgUn jUliA wrote...

@ themikefest: It's like dropping a jar of jam on the floor. Oh well.

But you know what bothers me more about the whole thing? How many Reapers we snuffed. It says they build one capital reaper per cycle. I counted something in the neighborhood of 9 capital reapers during the game. One would think that the other cycles would have scored a few hits on them as well. This tells me two things.

2) It tells me that the harvest was not sustainable. If the Reapers lost more than one capital ship per cycle, they lost ground. So to counter this argument, I think it was either Weekes or Gamble who said at a conference that the Reapers never lost a single ship until this cycle. Hearing that made me bust out laughing. A cycle as advanced as the Protheans never knocked out a single ship of any kind, and Commander Shepard takes down one on foot. Simply Amazing!

Fact: the reapers were a stupid idea.

Have you considered the possibility that the Reapers could rebuild themselves from a template?

If the Reaper isn't completely destroyed then if might be possible to repair it. If it's data, knowledge and so on had been damaged or destroyed then the Catalyst could probably download a copy from it's databanks. It would then become a working tool again.

[Invisible Man]

shodiswe wrote...

Bob from Accounting wrote...

sH0tgUn jUliA wrote...

@ themikefest: It's like dropping a jar of jam on the floor. Oh well.

But you know what bothers me more about the whole thing? How many Reapers we snuffed. It says they build one capital reaper per cycle. I counted something in the neighborhood of 9 capital reapers during the game. One would think that the other cycles would have scored a few hits on them as well. This tells me two things.

2) It tells me that the harvest was not sustainable. If the Reapers lost more than one capital ship per cycle, they lost ground. So to counter this argument, I think it was either Weekes or Gamble who said at a conference that the Reapers never lost a single ship until this cycle. Hearing that made me bust out laughing. A cycle as advanced as the Protheans never knocked out a single ship of any kind, and Commander Shepard takes down one on foot. Simply Amazing!

Fact: the reapers were a stupid idea.

Have you considered the possibility that the Reapers could rebuild themselves from a template?

If the Reaper isn't completely destroyed then if might be possible to repair it. If it's data, knowledge and so on had been damaged or destroyed then the Catalyst could probably download a copy from it's databanks. It would then become a working tool again.

I'm not sure that would work, as wouldn't you need millions of the beings from that particular species to get enough bio-gunk to build a new reaper shell/ship (hard to do if you've already killed them all off)? I mean if it's actually going to be a reaper, and not like imitation crabmeat vs crabmeat.

---edit
after that comparison I think I may have just turned myself off of crabmeat, for good.

Modifié par Invisible Man, 22 février 2014 - 10:57 .

[AlexMBrennan]

2) It tells me that the harvest was not sustainable. If the Reapers lost more than one capital ship per cycle, they lost ground. So to counter this argument, I think it was either Weekes or Gamble who said at a conference that the Reapers never lost a single ship until this cycle. Hearing that made me bust out laughing. A cycle as advanced as the Protheans never knocked out a single ship of any kind, and Commander Shepard takes down one on foot. Simply Amazing!

The protheans fell into the Citadel trap much like everyone before them, so the reapers had comically superior local force in every engagement if they sweep system by system with their entire fleet.

It tells me that the harvest was not sustainable

Do you know where the chicken and eggs you eat come from? Odds are some battery farm. Unless you are saying that a hyper advanced race of machine gods hasn't discovered animal husbandry there is no problem - just leave one planet relatively unmolested, pacify the locals with indoctrination/show of force and breed them until you've harvested enough organic goo to replace your casualties. Hell, they could have run such an operation from behind the omega 4 relay.

The idea is not as impossible as you suggest; Bioware didn't properly develop it but they could have done so.

[enayasoul]

NuclearPowers wrote...

Destroy.

Anything else doesn't really make sense for my Shepard. He came to destroy the reapers, not make buddy-buddy.

^ This.

[AlanC9]

AlexMBrennan wrote...
Do you know where the chicken and eggs you eat come from? Odds are some battery farm. Unless you are saying that a hyper advanced race of machine gods hasn't discovered animal husbandry there is no problem - just leave one planet relatively unmolested, pacify the locals with indoctrination/show of force and breed them until you've harvested enough organic goo to replace your casualties. Hell, they could have run such an operation from behind the omega 4 relay.

The idea is not as impossible as you suggest; Bioware didn't properly develop it but they could have done so.

Sure. While the Reapers prefer free-range organics and one Reaper per cycle, they don't absolutely have to do things that way.

[AlanC9]

One of these days I'd love to see Bio's stats on what players actually did.

Edit: the closest we've got is that infographic. While these do seem to be general survival stats for the series -- hence Tali and Kaidan being so low -- it's hard to reconcile Liara's 53% survival and EDI's 44% survival. Unless a lot of us played low EMS and brought Liara to the final battle?

Modifié par AlanC9, 22 février 2014 - 04:25 .

[TheMyron]

The death or survival of EDI and the Geth in the destroy ending should also have been based on your number of war assets. Like if you save the Reaper "brain" from the Collector base, the crucible's "target discrimination" could be programed to include EDI and the Geth.

Either that or we can all accept Lovelymaiden's (aka Nightfable on BSN) explanation of EDI and the Geth's survival in her version of events just as Shepard was about to initiate the Reaper's destruction.

Modifié par TheMyron, 22 février 2014 - 07:17 .