Aller au contenu

Photo

We shouldn't have fought the reapers


  • Veuillez vous connecter pour répondre
138 réponses à ce sujet

#1
Cainhurst Crow

Cainhurst Crow
  • Members
  • 11 374 messages

So the reapers, big bad machine-but-not-really things that come in and wipe out sentient life in the galaxy every 50,000 years, according to the opening scroll of mass effect 2 and 3. Does anyone else feel like we shouldn't have been able to fight these guys? To me, their cycle is something akin to the way stars live and die. They live, produce heat and light, and as they age they end up destabilizing in different ways and wiping out all life/matter from their solar systems, some burning them away, others becoming a black hole to compact them infinitely. There's not really any way to fight it, since its a force of nature, and nobody is really concerned about it either, given its millions of years away from happening.

 

I think the reapers being a constant and looming threat to the galaxy, much like the sun going supernova is for us, would have made a better setting for the story overall. It could provide a constant foil for us to have to fight, and it could have extended out the series massively, since they could have had the reapers invade 1000 years after mass effect 1, or 10,000, or even 100,000, and it would have kept in line with the reapers characters as patient observers and galaxy purgers. In that setting, methods to fight the reapers could be developed, preparations made, all this stuff, in reasonable stretches of time.

 

While at the same time, other stories set in the mass effect universe taking place on a smaller stage then the galactic one could have been aloud to play out. Galactic tensions between the terminus and council space, new species being discovered, breakdowns in relationships between species, reaper inspired conspiracies, all of these could offer as thrilling a story as mass effect 3 did, without removing one of the largest and more powerful influences in the setting, the force of death and change in the galaxy.

 

Here's hoping they can pick up the pieces in the next game, but in my opinion, by having a war with the reapers, they essentially blew a perfectly good story telling element in the series.


  • Eryri aime ceci

#2
sH0tgUn jUliA

sH0tgUn jUliA
  • Members
  • 16 812 messages

They weren't needed. Other foils are available. It wasn't necessary to have a war with them, however. Finding ways to foil them could have extended the series through 3, 4 and maybe 5. ME3 could have been FCW. 4 could have picked up right after the suicide mission, and 5 could have ended the series. I don't even think a war with the reapers would be necessary.



#3
Excella Gionne

Excella Gionne
  • Members
  • 10 444 messages

The Mass Effect series was meant to be a Trilogy from the start. Mass Effect 2 had almost three years apart from Mass Effect, and Mass Effect 2 had about 2 years apart from Mass Effect 3. Mass Effect 3, in my opinion, needed much more time before 2012. If Mass Effect 3 were released this year, I think it would have been way better. With Shepard dying in Mass Effect 2, it sped up the timeline and it sort of destroys the adventure of Mass Effect, because in Mass Effect 3, you were always rushing and rushing.



#4
teh DRUMPf!!

teh DRUMPf!!
  • Members
  • 9 142 messages

 Eh, no thanks. Reapers were not that fun to fight or interesting to continually reuse them over and over and over and...


  • Hazegurl aime ceci

#5
Bardox9

Bardox9
  • Members
  • 691 messages

OP... Your indoctrination is complete...


  • frylock23, I Tsunayoshi I, DeathScepter et 8 autres aiment ceci

#6
Reorte

Reorte
  • Members
  • 6 601 messages
It would've been better to not have had to fight them mostly because the events of ME1 would've made more sense.
  • Eryri aime ceci

#7
Little Princess Peach

Little Princess Peach
  • Members
  • 3 446 messages

The Reapers in the first game where at least to me a tad creepy but then they became a joke, I hope we wont have to deal with them in the next game


  • DeathScepter aime ceci

#8
grey_wind

grey_wind
  • Members
  • 3 304 messages

Or we could all just save ourselves a headache and not use antagonists as terribly conceived as the Reapers to begin with.

 

The setting and universe were interesting enough to stand on their own without an overly dramatic big bad apocalyptic enemy as a crutch.


  • teh DRUMPf!! aime ceci

#9
KaiserShep

KaiserShep
  • Members
  • 23 856 messages

I kinda wish we did kinda like what Garrus jokingly suggested in ME3 and sent them into some sort of black hole, but at the end of ME1 so they never came back.



#10
ahsari2014

ahsari2014
  • Members
  • 204 messages

The Reapers in the first game where at least to me a tad creepy but then they became a joke, I hope we wont have to deal with them in the next game

a joke ? Come on we needed the crucible to defeat them. It was the only way to defeat the reapers. The only way ! We were lucky that we found plans for the crucible. Shepard mentioned that also.

#11
Reorte

Reorte
  • Members
  • 6 601 messages

Or we could all just save ourselves a headache and not use antagonists as terribly conceived as the Reapers to begin with.
 
The setting and universe were interesting enough to stand on their own without an overly dramatic big bad apocalyptic enemy as a crutch.

They were decent enough in ME1 as a mysterious force, but after that they should've moved in to the background (because they should've been stuck in intergalactic space). No mystery ever really survives the reveal without quite a loss.
  • DeathScepter et zed888 aiment ceci

#12
SporkFu

SporkFu
  • Members
  • 6 921 messages

You mean fight Cerberus for three games? No thanks. Gimme reapers. 


  • DeathScepter, CaIIisto, Dabrikishaw et 1 autre aiment ceci

#13
Excella Gionne

Excella Gionne
  • Members
  • 10 444 messages

You mean fight Cerberus for three games? No thanks. Gimme reapers. 

Gimme Reapers, or Gimme death!



#14
dreamgazer

dreamgazer
  • Members
  • 15 759 messages

You mean fight Cerberus for three games? No thanks. Gimme reapers.

Naw. There's always the color-coded mercs.

#15
SporkFu

SporkFu
  • Members
  • 6 921 messages

Naw. There's always the color-coded mercs.

Sure, the game didn't lack a "variety" of enemies, but as a plot device to drive the trilogy? Gimme reapers. 


  • DeathScepter et Dabrikishaw aiment ceci

#16
Kurt M.

Kurt M.
  • Banned
  • 3 051 messages

Indoctrinated presence detected. Activating shutdown protocol.


  • DeathScepter, Blad3Zer0 et ZipZap2000 aiment ceci

#17
Excella Gionne

Excella Gionne
  • Members
  • 10 444 messages

Throw in those aliens from War of the Worlds(2005). That's what I call "harvesting."


  • Blad3Zer0 aime ceci

#18
Skirata129

Skirata129
  • Members
  • 1 992 messages

yeah, thought it was kind of ridiculous how quickly they arrived at the galaxy without the help of sovereign. Then the Crucible being conveniently discovered at the beginning of ME3 and everyone pouring all their assets into it despite having absolutely no clue of what it actually did was a bit much.


  • DeathScepter aime ceci

#19
TheOneTrueBioticGod

TheOneTrueBioticGod
  • Members
  • 1 110 messages

I personally think that there should have been far fewer Reapers, in the low double-digits. 

Without changing ME2, (which does need to be changed), ME3 could have been the huge, conventional galactic war with thrall races, like the Collectors, but on a far larger scale. 


  • DeathScepter et Dabrikishaw aiment ceci

#20
dreamgazer

dreamgazer
  • Members
  • 15 759 messages

Derelict Reaper was aged at (at the very least) 37,000,000 years in ME2, so that's the baseline number without changing anything about ME3. 

 

So, ~750 cycles at the minimum. 



#21
TheOneTrueBioticGod

TheOneTrueBioticGod
  • Members
  • 1 110 messages

Derelict Reaper was aged at (at the very least) 37,000,000 years in ME2, so that's the baseline number without changing anything about ME3. 

 

So, ~750 cycles at the minimum. 

Remember, the Turians destroyed a good deal of Reaper-capital ships by FTL jumping behind them and blowing them away. 

1 reaper capital maximum every 50,000 years, and a high mortality rate when compared to their birth rate. There really shouldn't be a lot of them. 



#22
Iakus

Iakus
  • Members
  • 30 399 messages

Well it's debatable if we fought the Reapers here.  Or did we flail ineffectively at them until their "guiding intelligence" decided to offer a suicide pact to Shepard?



#23
dreamgazer

dreamgazer
  • Members
  • 15 759 messages

Well it's debatable if we fought the Reapers here.  Or did we flail ineffectively at them until their "guiding intelligence" decided to offer a suicide pact to Shepard?

 

Why yes, the galaxy did decide against the utter and misguided futility of taking them on straight away, and it did end with trusting the technology of the Protheans---far from the first time---and firing said device to end the conflict. 



#24
dreamgazer

dreamgazer
  • Members
  • 15 759 messages

Remember, the Turians destroyed a good deal of Reaper-capital ships by FTL jumping behind them and blowing them away. 

1 reaper capital maximum every 50,000 years, and a high mortality rate when compared to their birth rate. There really shouldn't be a lot of them. 

 

Not sure how you can gauge the mortality rate of the other cycles.  I think the number I mentioned is probably about accurate for the lowest estimate, give or take a hundred, and there's no telling how many smaller ships they've got stashed away. 

 

Of course, ME3 blew the possibilities out of the water by canonizing that the Leviathan of Dis was a Reaper, something that was frequently speculated among the fanbase. 



#25
AlanC9

AlanC9
  • Members
  • 35 762 messages

Not sure how you can gauge the mortality rate of the other cycles.


Wishful thinking seems to be the usual method.