981 réponses à ce sujet

[SwobyJ]

The Reapers invade the galaxy? Wage war against us? Lol no. We're nothing. We exist only because they've allowed it. Why would their arrival be an 'invasion'?

 

[Hanako Ikezawa]

The Reapers invade the galaxy? Wage war against us? Lol no. We're nothing. We exist only because they've allowed it. Why would their arrival be an 'invasion'?

 

There is no war. There is only the harvest.

[sH0tgUn jUliA]

The Reapers are not interested in war. Is fire at war when it burns? Is it in conflict? Or is it doing what it was created to do? Like a cleansing fire blah blah blah....

[txgoldrush]

So the codex isn't canon?

Well the codex in ME1 said that the Mass Relays were build by the Protheans so in a way, it isn't canon. It is allowed by the writers to be contradicted.

 

The codex is written from a point of view of the characters, in this case, the Alliance...it is not hard lore.

[txgoldrush]

Who performs the actions in the plot? Characters. When characters speak, is that an action? Yes or no?

The act of speaking is a plot action, but what they say really isn't.

 

Once again, characters can be misinformed, biased, or outright lie. This is why character dialogue doesn't mean canon.

 

Vigil is wrong, get over it. And so is Sovereign. Shepard even mentions this in Leviathan.

[themikefest]

So when lightning causes forest fires, is lightning  at war with Earth? Or is it doing what its suppose to do?

[sH0tgUn jUliA]

So Leviathan is a giant retcon.

[Darks1d3]

So Leviathan is a giant retcon.

You're just now figuring this out? Ridiculous, was it not obvious?

 

 

[ImaginaryMatter]

I get characters can lie or be misinformed but that doesn't mean that later installments should tack on that kind of information without any kind of adeptness. And while technically not a retcon the Catalyst revelations still makes it a headache to try and rectify the Reapers across all three games into a single coherent view.

 

For example, In ME3 Shepard is told the Reapers are tools created with the sole purpose to harvest life and that they go about the task with the indifference of fire burning, so how does that match with Sovereign's and Harbinger's dialogues? They didn't seem particularly indifferent and they expressed nothing but disdain for organic life. Was this just a poor metaphor from the Catalyst and the Reapers actually have some sort of individual awareness of what they are doing, or were the talking Reapers running a villainous_machinegod.mnlgue file installed by the Catalyst to intimidate Organics if they managed to get within ear range?

 

Or lets go back to the Keepers for the billionth time. Are we to assume the Prothean scientists discovered another sabotage for the Citadel because it's needed for a fan speculation that tries to make sense of all of this? Is the Catalyst a hardware-less entity? Are the Leviathans terrible at programming?

 

I always thought the point of avoiding retcons was to avoid unnecessary confusion in the story and maintain a sense of consistency. While ME3 I guess isn't technically a retcon because we can just handwave everything off as some character from some past game being wrong about something, we're still left second guessing the writers on every other sentence uttered at the end of the game. Did the writers intend for this to be some subtle reveal about the nature of the Reapers or -- like the Thanix Missile and sudden new development of mass Mass Relay transit before it -- actions done to simply advance the plot without regards for what came before or without consideration for the implications? I'm leaning towards the later because if the ivory mook brigade taught me anything, it's that these writers are winging it when it comes to the overall story.

[Daemul]

The Codex in the Mass Effect series is written in a similar manner to how books in the Elder Scrolls games are written, from an in-universe perspective, it's written from the viewpoints of the inhabitants, not the players. The books in Elder Scrolls for example never provide 100% truth, they are subject to the limited knowledge and bias of the author. The books may have grains of truth in them, but they also have very misleading details and outright lies at some places.

[SwobyJ]

 

or were the talking Reapers running a villainous_machinegod.mnlgue file installed by the Catalyst to intimidate Organics if they managed to get within ear range?

 

Considering that EDI can do exactly that.... maybe?

[ImaginaryMatter]

The Codex in the Mass Effect series is written in a similar manner to how books in the Elder Scrolls games are written, from an in-universe perspective, it's written from the viewpoints of the inhabitants, not the players. The books in Elder Scrolls for example never provide 100% truth, they are subject to the limited knowledge and bias of the author. The books may have grains of truth in them, but they also have very misleading details and outright lies at some places.

 

I get that the Codex can be wrong. But if it is wrong that should be addressed in the story. Through Mass Effect you get contradictory information that is never explained.

 

For example, during the Rannoch arch the point of disabling the Dreadnought is to buy enough time for the Quarians fleets to retreat through the relay; however, according to the Codex it takes at least a week to this and it's a complicated matter. Surely, the bought time wasn't enough to safely get even a tiny fraction through yet the plan goes on regardless. Even in the end the Victory fleet seems to pop in relatively close together all within a few moments of each other.

[AlanC9]

For example, In ME3 Shepard is told the Reapers are tools created with the sole purpose to harvest life and that they go about the task with the indifference of fire burning, so how does that match with Sovereign's and Harbinger's dialogues?
 

I thought the point of that metaphor was that asking about the fire's motivation is the wrong question

[txgoldrush]

I get that the Codex can be wrong. But if it is wrong that should be addressed in the story. Through Mass Effect you get contradictory information that is never explained.

 

For example, during the Rannoch arch the point of disabling the Dreadnought is to buy enough time for the Quarians fleets to retreat through the relay; however, according to the Codex it takes at least a week to this and it's a complicated matter. Surely, the bought time wasn't enough to safely get even a tiny fraction through yet the plan goes on regardless. Even in the end the Victory fleet seems to pop in relatively close together all within a few moments of each other.

Why don't you blame ME1 for this as well?

 

The Battle of the Citadel when Sovereign and the Geth go through the relay all at once.

[txgoldrush]

I thought the point of that metaphor was that asking about the fire's motivation is the wrong question

Yes, it is.

 

Nothing suggests that the Reapers can't have different personalities as well.....nevermind, once again, the Catalyst is a consensus. And if the Crucible wasn;t docked, what makes people think that it would not be hostile like Sovereign as well?

[SwobyJ]

I would 'blame' ME1 for this as well.

 

It's very interesting, that.

[MassivelyEffective0730]

Yes, it is.

 

Nothing suggests that the Reapers can't have different personalities as well.....nevermind, once again, the Catalyst is a consensus. And if the Crucible wasn;t docked, what makes people think that it would not be hostile like Sovereign as well?

 

Based on what evidence?

[txgoldrush]

Based on what evidence?

Catalyst: I embody the collective intelligence of all Reapers.

[MassivelyEffective0730]

Catalyst: I embody the collective intelligence of all Reapers.

 

Where does that say anything about a consensus?

[txgoldrush]

Where does that say anything about a consensus?

Because he is a collection of every Reaper.

[MassivelyEffective0730]

Because he is a collection of every Reaper.

 

How does being a collection of every Reaper make them/him a consensus? Those are two completely different concepts that, while not being mutually exclusive, rarely go hand in hand together.

[txgoldrush]

How does being a collection of every Reaper make them/him a consensus? Those are two completely different concepts that, while not being mutually exclusive, rarely go hand in hand together.

 

If, "each is a nation and indepedent", is true...than the Catalyst IS a consensus. By nature, he would be.

[MassivelyEffective0730]

If, "each is a nation and indepedent", is true...than the Catalyst IS a consensus. By nature, he would be.

 

Then if he was a consensus, how would he be a collective? If he's a collective, how would he be a consensus here? He's saying that he's the sum of all their knowledge and that he controls them. And they say that they're independent. 

 

Which is it? There aren't semantics to it. They're one or the other in this case.

[txgoldrush]

Then if he was a consensus, how would he be a collective? If he's a collective, how would he be a consensus here? He's saying that he's the sum of all their knowledge and that he controls them. And they say that they're independent. 

 

Which is it? There aren't semantics to it. They're one or the other in this case.

1) They can believe that they are more independent than they are.

2) They can actually be independent and run on consensus, therefore the Catalyst "controls" them. They all believe, or mostly believe in the common goal.

 

But really, if you want to take Sovereign as truth that many here want to, why are there no rebel Reapers? Why do they all believe the same thing? here is ME1's problem, can't blame ME3's writers for writing around it.

[KaiserShep]

Wouldn't the control undermine the consensus?