152 réponses à ce sujet

[MassivelyEffective0730]

The fact that people are still beating this horse can be summed up in a few words:

 

 

Read my quote at the top of the last page. You're more than welcome to not post and not read others posts if you feel this way. No ones holding you to the fire.

[dreamgazer]

The meta-level reason is obvious enough: If the Reapers didn't wait, the setting wouldn't be possible. This is Mass Effect, not Primitive Organics That Get Harvested Before You Can Do Anything About It: The Game. I didn't feel any particular pressure to extrapolate beyond this meta-level point. Like Film Crit Hulk, I tend not to obsess over plot inconsistencies or bits of lore that are left dangling. And even some of Sovereign's other dialogue (i.e. "By using [the relays], your civilization develops along the paths we desire") seemed a bit like a hand waive to explain how granting us relay technology was somehow conducive to their interests.

Funny you should mention Film Crit Hulk ... A Few Words On The Ending Of MASS EFFECT 3 and A Few More Words On the Column About The Ending Of MASS EFFECT 3
 
Anyway, I think you're being overly generous with the purpose of the mass relays, given that the game's core antagonists made them and nothing that happens in the game would've gone down without them. And meta-context only goes so far when you're actually trying to tell a story, especially one involving science-fiction.
 

This begs the question, if the Reapers had goals other than self-interest, why would they see us as enemies to begin with, to the point of committing genocide against every advanced civilization save their own? I have a very difficult time seeing how anything other than self-interest could motivate something like the harvest, and I think the problems with both the Catalyst and the Dark Energy rumors bear out this pretty clearly.
 
And if we're going this route, then the significance of the whole "Our numbers will darken the skies" business gets significantly diminished as well. If the goal is to intimidate, you're not going to say, "Well, it's just me and a couple of my drinking buddies here, but we'll get you!"

Because organic life would resist no matter what, since they're chaotic. It's their entire purpose of existence: imposing order over the chaos. It's not unreasonable for the audience to ask "Why?" and "How?" in that instance.

Not sure where you're going with the intimidation paragraph.

[dreamgazer]

Don't worry. It'll get up if we keep beating it.

The cycle continues.

[Jorji Costava]

Funny you should mention Filk Crit Hulk ... A Few Words On The Ending Of MASS EFFECT 3 and A Few More Words On the Column About The Ending Of MASS EFFECT 3

I'm familiar with Hulk's writings on the ending. Suffice it to say I wasn't at all persuaded, although this is well-trodden ground for me at this point (I was a regular back on the old "All Were Thematically Revolting" thread) and I don't want to get into that debate again.
 

Anyway, I think you're being overly generous with the purpose of the mass relays, given that the game's core antagonists made them and nothing that happens in the game would've gone down without them. And meta-context only goes so far when you're actually trying to tell a story, especially one involving science-fiction.

For me anyway, the Reapers having built the Relays was mostly about establishing a history for the villains so we can understand how dangerous they are. It's fundamentally similar to the old trope of "4,000 years ago the forces of good fought the Evil Demon Lord, and now the Demon Lord is coming back!" We know the Demon Lord is dangerous because of what happened in the past, and we know the Reapers mean business because they built the relays and exploited our dependency on them to wipe out every cycle before ours. I'm also not sure how the issue of genre enters into it; would the Reaper motivations not being explained somehow break the rules of the universe? That doesn't seem clear to me.

Here's the question I really want to ask you: You've repeatedly brought up the cyclical extermination of all sentient species as being a key point of the series, but what I'm wondering is why this matters so much. What, thematically, is all of this stuff supposed to amount to?
 

Because organic life would resist no matter what, since they're chaotic. It's their entire purpose of existence: imposing order over the chaos. It's not unreasonable for the audience to ask "Why?" and "How?" in that instance.

Again, we're pushing the question back one step. Why does the Reaper plan, which is ultimately not for their own benefit, require doing something that all organics would resist violently? How could such an action amount to something that actually benefits organics?
 

Not sure where you're going with the intimidation paragraph.

This is on an unrelated point; sorry for not clarifying this. Anyway, you previously objected to me that my conventional victory scenario suggested upthread runs afoul of Sovereign's declaration that their numbers will darken the skies, etc. My point is that if Sovereign's just trying to intimidate us, it would be no surprise for him to exaggerate here.

[dreamgazer]

For me anyway, the Reapers having built the Relays was mostly about establishing a history for the villains so we can understand how dangerous they are. It's fundamentally similar to the old trope of "4,000 years ago the forces of good fought the Evil Demon Lord, and now the Demon Lord is coming back!" We know the Demon Lord is dangerous because of what happened in the past, and we know the Reapers mean business because they built the relays and exploited our dependency on them to wipe out every cycle before ours. I'm also not sure how the issue of genre enters into it; would the Reaper motivations not being explained somehow break the rules of the universe? That doesn't seem clear to me.

Here's the question I really want to ask you: You've repeatedly brought up the cyclical extermination of all sentient species as being a key point of the series, but what I'm wondering is why this matters so much. What, thematically, is all of this stuff supposed to amount to?

It's supposed to amount to something. That's the nature of science-fiction, even space operas: presenting questions, attempting to answer them, and justifying their place in the created universe. The Reapers erecting the relays---which accelerate advancement and networks other galactic civilizations---in their plot to impose order over chaos isn't an insignificant bit of trivia.

Again, we're pushing the question back one step. Why does the Reaper plan, which is ultimately not for their own benefit, require doing something that all organics would resist violently? How could such an action amount to something that actually benefits organics?

 
Because it's in their programming, and the series' antagonists are imposing their own ideals of systematic order. That doesn't mean you're supposed to agree with it. They are antagonists, after all, and oftentimes the most unique villains are those with warped versions of noble goals. Stopping organics before they destroy themselves, and cause harm to more than themselves, being said goal.

This is on an unrelated point; sorry for not clarifying this. Anyway, you previously objected to me that my conventional victory scenario suggested upthread runs afoul of Sovereign's declaration that their numbers will darken the skies, etc. My point is that if Sovereign's just trying to intimidate us, it would be no surprise for him to exaggerate here.

Even with the thousands of Reapers purported to be in ME3 given the Leviathan of Dis, even tens of thousands, it's still an exaggeration. They didn't literally darken the skies of every world. But there's enough of them to be successful for millions of years, at least, without losing once to any other advanced civilizations.

[Deathsaurer]

Ignoring Sovereign everything ever said about the Reaper fleet points to it being massive. Vigil calling them a galactic invasion fleet. Shepard saying hundreds of ships, maybe thousands. The ME2 end cinematic. They were never going to be a tiny fleet.

[Jorji Costava]

It's supposed to amount to something. That's the nature of science-fiction, even space operas: presenting questions, attempting to answer them, and justifying their place in the created universe. The Reapers erecting the relays---which accelerate advancement and networks other galactic civilizations---in their plot to impose order over chaos isn't an insignificant bit of trivia.

I'm not convinced your general point about the nature of science fiction is even true. A couple of examples: Why can't anyone get pregnant in Children of Men? And what the heck is going on with the Zone in Tarkovsky's Stalker? None of these questions are ever answered. And particularly when you're drawing on Lovecraftian imagery, which is all about the idea of the unknowable and uncontrollable, it seems like you have all the more reason to leave things unexplained.

I agree that the Reapers erecting the relays is not a trivial plot point, but I've suggested a couple ways in which it amounts to something. First, it establishes the Reapers as advanced and incredibly dangerous. Secondly, it undergirds the idea that we're bound to the past in a problematic way (hence the unavoidable destruction of the relays in ME3). Why isn't this enough? What is the thematic throughline of the series that requires further expansion on this point?
 

Because it's in their programming, and the series' antagonists are imposing their own ideals of systematic order. That doesn't mean you're supposed to agree with it. They are antagonists, after all, and oftentimes the most unique villains are those with warped versions of noble goals. Stopping organics before they destroy themselves, and cause harm to more than themselves, being said goal.

Fair enough, but I don't think the idea that there was some kind of warped nobility to the Reapers was ever foreshadowed at all in ME1. I'll go back to Sovereign's speech here; it's not a question of how, from an in-universe perspective, we would expect Sovereign to behave given that his agenda is such-and-such. It's a question of tone and presentation. What we get from the Reapers in ME1 is malice and contempt; we don't get any hint, via tone or any other device, that there is some kind of misguided nobility to the Reaper agenda.

EDIT: Fixed formatting, and removed some stuff.

[dreamgazer]

I'm not convinced your general point about the nature of science fiction is even true. A couple of examples: Why can't anyone get pregnant in Children of Men? And what the heck is going on with the Zone in Tarkovsky's Stalker? None of these questions are ever answered. And particularly when you're drawing on Lovecraftian imagery, which is all about the idea of the unknowable and uncontrollable, it seems like you have all the more reason to leave things unexplained.

There's a world of difference between something that could be easily explained, like widespread infertility, and the Reapers creating the relay network in conjunction with their agenda involving advanced civilizations. For one, it's a direct action from the game's core antagonist that assists the genetic mutation of organic life that needs to be controlled.

I agree that the Reapers erecting the relays is not a trivial plot point, but I've suggested a couple ways in which it amounts to something. First, it establishes the Reapers as advanced and incredibly dangerous. Secondly, it undergirds the idea that we're bound to the past in a problematic way (hence the unavoidable destruction of the relays in ME3). Why isn't this enough? What is the thematic throughline of the series that requires further expansion on this point?

Because their entire agenda pivots on cutting off civilization at the apex of their advancement of technology, established in ME1 by Sovereign. The mass relays speed up the advancement of organics' technology, controlled by their hands. The two are counter-intuitive if their overarching agenda isn't further fleshed out.
 

Fair enough, but I don't think the idea that there was some kind of warped nobility to the Reapers was ever foreshadowed at all in ME1. I'll go back to Sovereign's speech here; it's not a question of how, from an in-universe perspective, we would expect Sovereign to behave given that his agenda is such-and-such. It's a question of tone and presentation. What we get from the Reapers in ME1 is malice and contempt; we don't get any hint, via tone or any other device, that there is some kind of misguided nobility to the Reaper agenda.

Strongly disagreed. From the moment I heard Sovereign mention order and chaos, 50k years, pattern, and controlled development of technology, I immediately picked up on an underlying benign purpose. He's intimidating, because he's designed to be, but that doesn't mean he serves an entirely sinister agenda.

[Jorji Costava]

There's a world of difference between something that could be easily explained, like widespread infertility, and the Reapers creating the relay network in conjunction with their agenda involving advanced civilizations. For one, it's a direct action from the game's core antagonist that assists the genetic mutation of organic life that needs to be controlled.

I dunno, still seems like a difference of degree rather than kind. The Zone and its mysteries, after all, are far more central to to Stalker than the Reapers ever were to ME; I'd say at least 50% of the dialogue in the film is in some way, shape or form about or somehow relevant to the Zone, and that is a very conservative estimate. Yet its central mysteries are never explained. In fact, we never learn if it is actually anything other than an utterly mundane landscape.
 

Because their entire agenda pivots on cutting off civilization at the apex of their advancement of technology, established in ME1 by Sovereign. The mass relays speed up the advancement of organics' technology, controlled by their hands. The two are counter-intuitive if their overarching agenda isn't further fleshed out.

Sure it's counter-intuitive, but what you're describing to me sounds like a plot hole, and as I indicated above, I don't have much interest in policing those. There's a lot of counter-intuitive stuff in Stalker, too; why does the Stalker keep throwing around those Washer things when he's negotiating the Zone? It seems odd, and we never find out if it has a discernible effect.

This is where it starts to seem like we're talking past each other; you're talking plot, and I'm much more interested in theme. What you're arguing is that if the Reapers are left largely unexplained, then the mechanics of the plot don't work smoothly, whereas my claim is that the Reapers don't have the thematic resonance that a lot of people seem to think they have. If I'm wrong, then I ask again: What, thematically, is at stake as far as the explanation of the Reapers is concerned?
 

Strongly disagreed. From the moment I heard Sovereign mention order and chaos, 50k years, pattern, and controlled development of technology, I immediately picked up on an underlying benign purpose. He's intimidating, because he's designed to be, but that doesn't mean he serves an entirely sinister agenda.

We'll just have to agree to disagree here. As far as I can see, these plot elements have a fairly clear function in sustaining the setting, establishing the history of the reapers as a credible threat, etc. A thing can be intimidating without being insulting and contemptuous, and Sovereign definitely leans towards the latter.

/night

EDIT: Fixed formatting.

[wolfhowwl]

Strongly disagreed. From the moment I heard Sovereign mention order and chaos, 50k years, pattern, and controlled development of technology, I immediately picked up on an underlying benign purpose. He's intimidating, because he's designed to be, but that doesn't mean he serves an entirely sinister agenda.

 

The Inhibitors from Revelation Space, BioWare's...inspiration for the Reapers, were also revealed to have an underlying mission for the "greater good."

[dreamgazer]

Sure it's counter-intuitive, but what you're describing to me sounds like a plot hole, and as I indicated above, I don't have much interest in policing those. There's a lot of counter-intuitive stuff in Stalker, too; why does the Stalker keep throwing around those Washer things when he's negotiating the Zone? It seems odd, and we never find out if it has a discernible effect.

The difference here lies in structure, and the entire universe's reliance on the relays. I'm not interested in policing plot holes, either, but I'm interested in answers to justified questions that the narrative intentionally provokes.
 

This is where it starts to seem like we're talking past each other; you're talking plot, and I'm much more interested in theme. What you're arguing is that if the Reapers are left largely unexplained, then the mechanics of the plot don't work smoothly, whereas my claim is that the Reapers don't have the thematic resonance that a lot of people seem to think they have. If I'm wrong, then I ask again: What, thematically, is at stake as far as the explanation of the Reapers is concerned?

The balance between rudimentary technology, sufficiently-advanced technology, self-destructive technology and self-aware technology is a theme in and of itself, one that persists and advances in our current civilization. The idea of self-destruction in general is pertinent, too, tangentially in relation to climate degradation and WMDs. That's the one area I actually don't dislike about the dark energy idea: its focus on civilization over-exerting its resources to a point that required desperate measures. In short, my musings about the Reapers were always about what they were preventing, the extent of the chaos that required their order.
 
 

We'll just have to agree to disagree here. As far as I can see, these plot elements have a fairly clear function in sustaining the setting, establishing the history of the reapers as a credible threat, etc. A thing can be intimidating without being insulting and contemptuous, and Sovereign definitely leans towards the latter.

And again, I refer to the idea of demoralization despite one's intentions towards their enemy. What use is the fight if we're nothing but an accidental mutation, and far from the first to be eradicated? At the time of Sovereign's speech in ME1, this cycle was nothing more than the next round in their eternal cosmic war with technology and biological mutation.

[Bob from Accounting]

This isn't clear to me at all. In The Birds, no explanation of why birds are attacking everyone is ever given. In Children of Men, several explanations for global infertility are suggested, but the film never answers which, if any, is the correct one. Further, I don't see why the explanation of why they kill only advanced civilizations couldn't be in terms of self interest. At any rate, it shouldn't be more difficult than explaining the harvest as something that's somehow for the good of organics or the galaxy as a whole.

 

No. Complete apples and oranges.

 

Mass Effect is different from all these stories because Mass Effect goes out of it's way to foreshadow, to make certain that something more than meets the eye is going on. The viewer is perfectly free to think the plague in Children of Men is just a plague and everything in the story is supportive of such a simple explanation. Only a complete idiot would think the Reapers didn't have a clear and precise purpose at the conclusion of ME 1.

 

The Reapers are precise. They have a pattern that not only suggests, but demands, something much more is going on than big meany aliens killing everyone.

[Obadiah]

Forgot about awesome Hulk's article was.

[Bob from Accounting]

You've also neglected to consider the type of protagonist in the story.

 

There are plenty of stories where there's an overarching mystery of some type but the protagonist doesn't particularly care because it's not really his business. Often he's just trying to survive. Often he's simply not an investigative person.

 

Mass Effect could not be more different from those stories in that aspect. In that, first, Shepard is the point-man on pretty much every investigation of the Reapers. He is the person attempting to learn about them. Second, the player is encouraged to ask questions, investigate, and so forth at every opportunity. It's a tone of the story - to investigate, to learn more. Not to shoot zombies and leave their origins to someone else.

 

So no. Leaving them unexplained because other stories did would not work at all.

[Jorji Costava]

It looks like there is no end in sight to this cycle, and I've almost certainly written about it more than any grown man should, so this is absolutely the last thing I will say about this subject:

The difference here lies in structure, and the entire universe's reliance on the relays. I'm not interested in policing plot holes, either, but I'm interested in answers to justified questions that the narrative intentionally provokes.

Again, I avert to the example of Stalker (FYI, the game S.T.A.L.K.E.R. is heavily inspired by this movie). If you watched that film without ever asking questions about the true nature of the Zone, then you fell asleep way earlier than most people watching that film do. The characters' central motive in the story is to investigate these questions. But again, these questions, while persistently, insistently asked, are never answered. Sometimes, the uncertainty is the point. And when you draw on Lovecraft as much as the ME writers did, you are most definitely courting uncertainty of the most radical kind.
 

The balance between rudimentary technology, sufficiently-advanced technology, self-destructive technology and self-aware technology is a theme in and of itself, one that persists and advances in our current civilization. The idea of self-destruction in general is pertinent, too, tangentially in relation to climate degradation and WMDs. That's the one area I actually don't dislike about the dark energy idea: its focus on civilization over-exerting its resources to a point that required desperate measures. In short, my musings about the Reapers were always about what they were preventing, the extent of the chaos that required their order.

This is much better. Still, I have a couple of points to make here. First, the problems associated with various kinds of technology were always most successfully explored outside the context of the Reapers (i.e. the Krogan being uplifted by the Salarians, the Quarian/Geth war, etc.). Some of these threads were essentially wrapped up before the end (i.e. Rannoch should have been, for all intents and purposes, the game's definitive statement on organic/synthetic relations), so when they returned to prominence in those final moments, we ended up repeating story beats that we'd long since hit. That's a part of why I don't think the Reapers have much thematic significance: At best they're redundant, and at worst they're actively harmful.

Second, I view character as in general more expressive of theme than plot mechanics. The genophage, for instance, would lack thematic resonance if not for characters like Wrex and Mordin to provide perspective on it. By contrast, there's no analogue to this in the case of the Reaper agenda. The Reapers' mysterious goals do not play a significant role in the arc of any major character in the way that the genophage shapes Wrex or Mordin's arc. Sure people are curious about their goals, but mostly as a way of finding out how to stop them. Anyone who thinks that the Reapers may have any genuine insight into anything is portrayed as deluded and treasonously so (TIM, Saren, even the Hanar diplomat in Kasumi's ME3 mission). These decisions suggest to me that the thematic significance of Reaper agenda is less than might be supposed.
 

And again, I refer to the idea of demoralization despite one's intentions towards their enemy. What use is the fight if we're nothing but an accidental mutation, and far from the first to be eradicated? At the time of Sovereign's speech in ME1, this cycle was nothing more than the next round in their eternal cosmic war with technology and biological mutation.

And again, I refer to the importance of dialogue and tone as mechanisms of characterization. Sovereign has precious little time with which to make an impression, and in that time, the player (not just the player avatar) needs to be conveyed information about what sort of dude he is. It's a poor use of time to dedicate these brief moments to having Sovereign give a "reason you suck" speech even though in reality, he basically means well, and then kill off the character before we ever get any indication that his bloviating might not have expressed his true attitude towards us.

[dreamgazer]

Again, I avert to the example of Stalker (FYI, the game S.T.A.L.K.E.R. is heavily inspired by this movie). If you watched that film without ever asking questions about the true nature of the Zone, then you fell asleep way earlier than most people watching that film do. The characters' central motive in the story is to investigate these questions. But again, these questions, while persistently, insistently asked, are never answered. Sometimes, the uncertainty is the point. And when you draw on Lovecraft as much as the ME writers did, you are most definitely courting uncertainty of the most radical kind.

I understand your point, and I understand the point behind Tarkovsky's enigmatic ideas. Solaris contains similar attributes, though there's an inherent sense of curiosity towards the "how" and "why" in that one. However, something that's hard-wired to the narrative like the mass relays is on a different level, for the reasons I've already mentioned about counter-intuitive measures, advance technology, and the entire narrative hinging on the tech's functionality.
 

This is much better. Still, I have a couple of points to make here. First, the problems associated with various kinds of technology were always most successfully explored outside the context of the Reapers (i.e. the Krogan being uplifted by the Salarians, the Quarian/Geth war, etc.). Some of these threads were essentially wrapped up before the end (i.e. Rannoch should have been, for all intents and purposes, the game's definitive statement on organic/synthetic relations), so when they returned to prominence in those final moments, we ended up repeating story beats that we'd long since hit. That's a part of why I don't think the Reapers have much thematic significance: At best they're redundant, and at worst they're actively harmful.

I'd hardly consider the tentative truce between the geth and quarians as a definitive statement on organic-synthetic relations since the synthetic processes could arrive at a new consensus in a flash, whether it's sparked by a shift in computational number-crunching or organics' obstinate nature. Conflict existed there before the Reapers' intervention, conflict again mushroomed out of control when they received an offer from an imposing outside force, and it could very easily happen again with future conflicts. Debatable is an understatement, whether you're hopeful about the outcome or not.
 

Second, I view character as in general more expressive of theme than plot mechanics. The genophage, for instance, would lack thematic resonance if not for characters like Wrex and Mordin to provide perspective on it. By contrast, there's no analogue to this in the case of the Reaper agenda. The Reapers' mysterious goals do not play a significant role in the arc of any major character in the way that the genophage shapes Wrex or Mordin's arc. Sure people are curious about their goals, but mostly as a way of finding out how to stop them. Anyone who thinks that the Reapers may have any genuine insight into anything is portrayed as deluded and treasonously so (TIM, Saren, even the Hanar diplomat in Kasumi's ME3 mission). These decisions suggest to me that the thematic significance of Reaper agenda is less than might be supposed.

That's another thematic point that continues throughout Mass Effect: the effects of distrusting words of caution about legitimate detrimental threats against civilization, and the overbearing presence of political figures that strive to quash those warnings. That resonates within the player-character directly, across all three games. Hence, why order and chaos, 50k years, pattern, and controlled development of technology resonated as something benign underneath the abrasive intimidation. Remove the Reapers, and there's still the chaos they mentioned, and how it factors into the relays themselves and their space-faring travel tech.
 

And again, I refer to the importance of dialogue and tone as mechanisms of characterization. Sovereign has precious little time with which to make an impression, and in that time, the player (not just the player avatar) needs to be conveyed information about what sort of dude he is. It's a poor use of time to dedicate these brief moments to having Sovereign give a "reason you suck" speech even though in reality, he basically means well, and then kill off the character before we ever get any indication that his bloviating might not have expressed his true attitude towards us.

Meaning well with a warped agenda or not, at that point there's still going to be an extermination squad that's designed for the "greater good". It preserves order amid chaos while monitoring the cultural and technological growth of organics, and, when the time's precisely right, choking them off to start anew. No matter what, the Reapers still have a job to do, and it makes sense to shake the resolve of the first resistant avatar of this organic civilization.

[KaiserShep]

All this stuff about whether or not the Reaper motives should have been answered doesn't really matter. What matters is whether or not there's a particularly good answer to "Why are the reapers doing this?" Had it been something better than, say, turning organics into a primordial smoothie for the worst flash drives in the universe, then great! But, alas...

 

A mystery doomed to have a crappy answer is probably best left unanswered.

[dreamgazer]

All this stuff about whether or not the Reaper motives should have been answered doesn't really matter. What matters is whether or not there's a particularly good answer to "Why are the reapers doing this?" Had it been something better than, say, turning organics into a primordial smoothie for the worst flash drives in the universe, then great! But, alas...
 
A mystery doomed to have a crappy answer is probably best left unanswered.

Eh, they had to do something with the mess dropped on them by the Baby Reaper, the Collectors' ultimate purpose, and the process of absorbing the genetic essence of organics.  Else, similar to the relays being erected by the Reapers, it's just a bunch of sloppy bomb-dropping that's half-heartedly justified by Lovecraftian mystique.

[KaiserShep]

Fair point I guess, and that's where it really starts to fall apart. Maybe the reapers should've been like a murderous version of Johnny 5, constantly craving input.

[Iakus]

Eh, they had to do something with the mess dropped on them by the Baby Reaper, the Collectors' ultimate purpose, and the process of absorbing the genetic essence of organics.  Else, similar to the relays being erected by the Reapers, it's just a bunch of sloppy bomb-dropping that's half-heartedly justified by Lovecraftian mystique.

 

Like, say, all the mentions of dark energy in ME2? 

[dreamgazer]

Like, say, all the mentions of dark energy in ME2? 

 

Yeah, they really dodged a bullet with that one, thank goodness.

 

And yes, all half-dozen (or less?) missable mentions of dark energy in ME2, which is small potatoes in comparison to the conflict between synthetics and organics in the continuation of the geth-quarian plotline. 

[Fixers0]

And yes, all half-dozen missable mentions of dark energy in ME2, which is small potatoes in comparison to the conflict between synthetics and organics in the continuation of the geth-quarian plotline. 

 

And both are completely optional in Mass Effect 2, in addtion the fact that the geth and quarians are respectively synthetic and organic is purely a coincidence. The Geth could be an organic servant species bio-engineerd by the quarians and the base narrative could remain reletively unchanged. 

[dreamgazer]

And both are completely optional in Mass Effect 2, in addtion the fact that the geth and quarians are respectively synthetic and organic is purely a coincidence. The Geth could be an organic servant species bio-engineerd by the quarians and the base narrative could remain reletively unchanged.

Except for everything Tali reveals about the geth in ME1, of course.