370 réponses à ce sujet

[teh DRUMPf!!]

This is just nonsense. The Geth butchered the Quarians until 1% of them were left, EDI slaughtered everyone on the moon (except Shepard), the CItadel AI made sure it's creator rotted away in a prison (essentially killing it) and last, but not least... definetly not least, the Catalyst butchered the Leviathan (also off by 1%, not even AI are flawless ). In all of these the Reapers played no role, and the last of them created the Reapers.

 

And most seem to forget that this conflict is not new to this cycle. The ban on AI was in place before the creation of the Geth, not because of the creation of the Geth. Scholars agreed that AI and organics living together would at least be problematic and quite likely impossible.

 

Don't forget that EDI is a mandatory squadmate on the mission to Cerberus HQ. Ever wonder why that is? It's because in doing so, she effectively destroys the entity that created her, which plays to the idea behind the end of the game.

 

Javik points out this phenomenon (EDI killing those who created her) in an intercom conversation with her as well, for good measure.

[Iakus]

And? I did not deny their existence.

The Reapers seem to think war (excuse me, "conflict") is the natural, perpetual state.

 

It's a lot more complicated than that.

[ImaginaryMatter]

This is just nonsense. The Geth butchered the Quarians until 1% of them were left, EDI slaughtered everyone on the moon (except Shepard), the CItadel AI made sure it's creator rotted away in a prison (essentially killing it) and last, but not least... definetly not least, the Catalyst butchered the Leviathan (also off by 1%, not even AI are flawless ). In all of these the Reapers played no role, and the last of them created the Reapers.

 

And most seem to forget that this conflict is not new to this cycle. The ban on AI was in place before the creation of the Geth, not because of the creation of the Geth. Scholars agreed that AI and organics living together would at least be problematic and quite likely impossible.

 

Technically the Citadel AI was created by another AI, that other AI was created by the organic guy. Also, and this is mostly philosophical, I don't consider EDI and the Luna VI to be the same 'person'.

 

Any way, the Organic vs Synthetic thing in the ending bothers me more on a thematic level than a logical one. Yes there's conflict between the two but the nature of the conflict as the ending frames it is different than what the later two games, especially ME3, had to say about it.

[Farangbaa]

Technically the Citadel AI was created by another AI, that other AI was created by the organic guy. Also, and this is mostly philosophical, I don't consider EDI and the Luna VI to be the same 'person'.

 

Any way, the Organic vs Synthetic thing in the ending bothers me more on a thematic level than a logical one. Yes there's conflict between the two but the nature of the conflict as the ending frames it is different than what the later two games, especially ME3, had to say about it.

 

See Hyr's post if you see Luna VI and EDI as different persons

As for the Citadel AI being created by another AI. That's like a baby of the original one.

[Iakus]

 

 

They try to stop organics from creating synthetics. Imagine this: Leviathan's create an AI to stop their lesser subjects from being destroyed by their own created synthetics. In their arrogance they didn't think that the solution of the AI will include the Leviathans themselves. The solution was to doom the cycle failed and to destroy all civilizations while preserving their essence in Reaper database. New civilizations have everything ready for them, mass relays, citadel etc. They have no need to create synthetics but yet every cycle does the same thing. And every cycle the Reapers return to reset the galactic civilization to the blank state and give a chance to the other non-harvested species to do what the others failed - succeed in not creating intelligent machines to do their bidding. No race succeeds to do so and every cycle the pattern repeats.

 

 

And this has to do with the zha'til, how?

 

That race was, based on Javik's description, something pretty close to Synthesis, achieved on their own.  Organic and synthetic life living in harmony. 

 

Until the Reapers suborned the programming of the synthetics, forcing the Protheans to destroy them.  The Reapers turned their dogma of inevitable conflict into a self-fulfilling prophecy. 

[Iakus]

The Reapers did not instigate the geth/quarian conflict.

 

Even if they did, your analysis of the problem fails to count the Reapers/Catalyst themselves as synthetics creating conflict with organics. If you want proof that AI can potentially grow too large, too powerful, and out-of-hand, it's standing right there in front of you. That's what people fail to realize about the ending. It's not introducing some new problem; it is a reframing of the overarching Reaper conflict. What you're being asked, essentially, is what do you want to do to protect against a threat like the Reapers in the future. Your options are: inaction (Destroy), regulation (Control), prevention (Sync).

 

*edit* Or denial (Refuse). Almost forgot that one.

The krogan were a pretty large, powerful force that came closer to wiping out galactic life than the Reapers ever did.

 

They're organics, by the way.

[Vazgen]

And this has to do with the zha'til, how?

 

That race was, based on Javik's description, something pretty close to Synthesis, achieved on their own.  Organic and synthetic life living in harmony. 

 

Until the Reapers suborned the programming of the synthetics, forcing the Protheans to destroy them.  The Reapers turned their dogma of inevitable conflict into a self-fulfilling prophecy. 

 

Arguing about zha is useless, since we don't have any information on them beside Javik's words. The symbiotic relation Javik describes can very much be a slavery of an organic race to the machines. Reapers just took it a step further. Since there is no info, we can't say anything for sure. 

Besides, Reapers are a part of the problem, Catalyst views them as such. Their return every 50000 years is an account of synthetics fighting organics. It can seem hypocritical but they don't have such qualities. They are programmed to do so until some civilization is strong enough to use the Crucible and alter the solution.

[Aimi]

The other thing is the certainty that you just can't defeat the Reapers in a conventional war because they are just too powerful.  I say that is complete rubbish.  The U.S. had superior military power in Vietnam and couldn't win there.  The Soviet Union lost in Afghanistan.  You can beat the Reapers, you just don't take them head-on.  One way is a war of attrition, but would require heavy sacrifices.  You could use the Trojan horse strategy.  Leak where the Crucible is being built, but it's a fake location.  Evacuate people from the planets in that system beforehand.  Lure as many Reapers into the system as you can, engage them for a short time and then run for the exit.  After the last ship gets out ahead of the Reapers, a timed explosive blows the mass relay and destroys the whole system and the Reapers with it.  There's always viral warfare.  The same technique the Reapers use to indoctrinate can be turned against them.  Infect the Reapers, change their programming, turn them on each other.  The writers went out of their way to make it all so hopeless and there was just nothing anyone could do to stop this menace.

Both of your examples - Afghanistan and Vietnam - are examples of a distant power with public-opinion and financial problems attempting to set up a loyal, stable local government that could be left to its own devices and withdraw. They were not battlefield force-on-force victories - both the American and Soviet militaries were virtually unchallengeable in that sense. The Reapers had no such problem. They were not out to set up a puppet government that could run things on autopilot, they were out to eradicate all higher organic life. Vietnam and Afghanistan are irrelevant in such a context.

"War of attrition" is a label often applied but almost never understood. Fundamentally, all combat is attritive: both sides lose troops, and both sides try to achieve a favorable kill ratio because running out of troops first is a bad thing. The label "war of attrition", however, is most popularly used to describe scenarios with minimal operational or strategic maneuver, in which soldiers are sacrificed in high-casualty operations in the hopes of generating some sort of advantage somehow. It is used in lieu of alternative, low-casualty options, with the implication being that the only way to give an enemy any pause at all is spending lives, bar none.

Leave aside that this popular take on "attrition" is a fundamental misunderstanding of the original articulation of the strategy. It is difficult to see when such a strategy has ever actually worked in doing what it intended historically, and it is even harder to see how it would be relevant against the Reapers. Javik, for example, claims that Prothean fighting against Reapers focused on attrition, which supposedly slowed the Reapers down (how? why?) and gave Prothean forces time to regroup. Effectively, the Protheans inflicted shattering defeats on their own forces in order to give their ruined military an opportunity to recover from their own insane strategy. Rinse and repeat. This is not a recipe for survival, let alone victory. Notice that Javik never mentions the hope of inflicting higher relative casualties on Reaper forces (probably because it was not possible): this makes Prothean strategy not "attrition", but suicide.

A mass-relay explosion trap for the Reapers is a moderately interesting and potentially useful (if hardly new) idea, but there are problems. The number of Reapers that would actually engage a Crucible under construction is questionable. So is the presumption that they wouldn't see such a trap coming, or that they wouldn't simply enter FTL travel to escape instead. Such a device would also only work once, if at all. Any idea is better than no idea, but one idea isn't enough to win a war. It doesn't change the fundamental calculus that the Reapers outnumber and outgun and out-tech the civilizations of the galaxy, and that they cannot be crippled politically or negotiated away from their path of extermination.

Also, such a plan would only work if the Crucible were a viable weapon to use against the Reapers (otherwise, why would they attack it?). If that's the case, that sort of devalues your CONVENTIONAL VICTORY AT ALL COSTS message.

Indoctrinating Reapers, while also a potentially useful idea - as, apparently, Sanctuary made clear - also doesn't really qualify for conventional warfare for any definition of "conventional" that I've ever seen. It just replicates the Crucible's function without replicating its form.

[Iakus]

 

 

Arguing about zha is useless, since we don't have any information on them beside Javik's words. The symbiotic relation Javik describes can very much be a slavery of an organic race to the machines. Reapers just took it a step further. Since there is no info, we can't say anything for sure. 

Besides, Reapers are a part of the problem, Catalyst views them as such. Their return every 50000 years is an account of synthetics fighting organics. It can seem hypocritical but they don't have such qualities. They are programmed to do so until some civilization is strong enough to use the Crucible and alter the solution.

 

If arguing about the Zha'til is useless, then everything the Catalyst says is useless as well.  It's all secondhand information at best.  It is no better a source of information than Javik.

[sH0tgUn jUliA]

We knew you were going to create synthetics that would kill you, so we made a bunch of synthetics to kill you before you made a bunch of synthetics that would kill you.

[Farangbaa]

We knew you were going to create synthetics that would kill you, so we made a bunch of synthetics to kill you before you made a bunch of synthetics that would kill you.

Yeah, that's all fine and dandy, but the Catalyst doesn't think it's killing anyone.

You're limited by your organic views

[Iakus]

Both of your examples - Afghanistan and Vietnam - are examples of a distant power with public-opinion and financial problems attempting to set up a loyal, stable local government that could be left to its own devices and withdraw. They were not battlefield force-on-force victories - both the American and Soviet militaries were virtually unchallengeable in that sense. The Reapers had no such problem. They were not out to set up a puppet government that could run things on autopilot, they were out to eradicate all higher organic life. Vietnam and Afghanistan are irrelevant in such a context.

"War of attrition" is a label often applied but almost never understood. Fundamentally, all combat is attritive: both sides lose troops, and both sides try to achieve a favorable kill ratio because running out of troops first is a bad thing. The label "war of attrition", however, is most popularly used to describe scenarios with minimal operational or strategic maneuver, in which soldiers are sacrificed in high-casualty operations in the hopes of generating some sort of advantage somehow. It is used in lieu of alternative, low-casualty options, with the implication being that the only way to give an enemy any pause at all is spending lives, bar none.

Leave aside that this popular take on "attrition" is a fundamental misunderstanding of the original articulation of the strategy. It is difficult to see when such a strategy has ever actually worked in doing what it intended historically, and it is even harder to see how it would be relevant against the Reapers. Javik, for example, claims that Prothean fighting against Reapers focused on attrition, which supposedly slowed the Reapers down (how? why?) and gave Prothean forces time to regroup. Effectively, the Protheans inflicted shattering defeats on their own forces in order to give their ruined military an opportunity to recover from their own insane strategy. Rinse and repeat. This is not a recipe for survival, let alone victory. Notice that Javik never mentions the hope of inflicting higher relative casualties on Reaper forces (probably because it was not possible): this makes Prothean strategy not "attrition", but suicide.

A mass-relay explosion trap for the Reapers is a moderately interesting and potentially useful (if hardly new) idea, but there are problems. The number of Reapers that would actually engage a Crucible under construction is questionable. So is the presumption that they wouldn't see such a trap coming, or that they wouldn't simply enter FTL travel to escape instead. Such a device would also only work once, if at all. Any idea is better than no idea, but one idea isn't enough to win a war. It doesn't change the fundamental calculus that the Reapers outnumber and outgun and out-tech the civilizations of the galaxy, and that they cannot be crippled politically or negotiated away from their path of extermination.

Also, such a plan would only work if the Crucible were a viable weapon to use against the Reapers (otherwise, why would they attack it?). If that's the case, that sort of devalues your CONVENTIONAL VICTORY AT ALL COSTS message.

Indoctrinating Reapers, while also a potentially useful idea - as, apparently, Sanctuary made clear - also doesn't really qualify for conventional warfare for any definition of "conventional" that I've ever seen. It just replicates the Crucible's function without replicating its form.

To some people "conventional victory"="anything that's not space magic"

 

But the problem with the Reapers is Bioware decided that the galaxy is invaded by roughly 200,000 Soverign-class Reapers and perhaps as many as a million destroyers.  If there was any logic to the game at all, a "Game OVer" screen should have flashed as soon as the Reapers hit Earth.

[Vazgen]

If arguing about the Zha'til is useless, then everything the Catalyst says is useless as well.  It's all secondhand information at best.  It is no better a source of information than Javik.

Except there is also an account from Leviathans to shed more light on the issue

[teh DRUMPf!!]

The krogan were a pretty large, powerful force that came closer to wiping out galactic life than the Reapers ever did.

 

They're organics, by the way.

 

... what are you talking about? The Reapers' record of wiping out entire worlds and civilizations is far beyond what the krogan ever accomplished, or could hope to.

 

Also, the krogan's goal in their war was conquest, to seize resources and subjugate populations. What makes synthetics more dangerous than organics is that they don't need the resources we rely on and can do us in by taking those away. Look at how the geth drove out the quarians. They flooded the planet with toxins. They also made 0 distinction between combatants and civilians; everyone was a target. At least organics focus on the ones that are armed.

[Iakus]

Except there is also an account from Leviathans to shed more light on the issue

All the Leviathans reveal is they are the ones who created "the intelligence" and why. 

 

And again, by your logic, their information is useless too, since they are the descendants of those Leviathans.  So all they have is hearsay as well.

[Coyotebay]

I find the whole synthetic vs. organic angle very simplistic.  Along with the evolution of AI technology, so too will be the advancement of biology and genetics, and integrating synthetic parts and processes into living beings.  By the time synthetic beings come around, humans and synthetics will be more alike than people think.  And it's also a fallacy to say that something completely synthetic is just going to be vastly superior to anything biological.  There is nothing more complex or adaptable than biology.  Having harnessed the power of genetic engineering, humans may one day evolve themselves into something superior than any synthetic creation.  And then you can make the same Reaper-like argument.  You might have a race of super humans living among regular humans, the super humans and regular humans come into conflict and regular humans get wiped out.

[Iakus]

... what are you talking about? The Reapers' record of wiping out entire worlds and civilizations is far beyond what the krogan ever accomplished, or could hope to.

 

Also, the krogan's goal in their war was conquest, to seize resources and subjugate populations. What makes synthetics more dangerous than organics is that they don't need the resources we rely on and can do us in by taking those away. Look at how the geth drove out the quarians. They flooded the planet with toxins. They also made 0 distinction between combatants and civilians; everyone was a target. At least organics focus on the ones that are armed.

The krogan commited wars of genocide, including dropping rocks on garden worlds.  They are less reliant on those very resources, which is what made them so effective in the rachni wars.

 

Oh, yeah, the rachni, whom the krogan did drive to extinction (barring that one egg)

[Iakus]

I find the whole synthetic vs. organic angle very simplistic.  Along with the evolution of AI technology, so too will be the advancement of biology and genetics, and integrating synthetic parts and processes into living beings.  By the time synthetic beings come around, humans and synthetics will be more alike than people think.  And it's also a fallacy to say that something completely synthetic is just going to be vastly superior to anything biological.  There is nothing more complex or adaptable than biology.  Having harnessed the power of genetic engineering, humans may one day evolve themselves into something superior than any synthetic creation.  And then you can make the same Reaper-like argument.  You might have a race of super humans living among regular humans, the super humans and regular humans come into conflict and regular humans get wiped out.

I've pointed this out before too.  Biotech beyond cloning and some gene therapies is basically forgotten.  Despite the lore stating this is a matter of great concern, as there are strict laws forbidding tinkering too much with DNA.  just as there are laws against AI research.

[teh DRUMPf!!]

We knew you were going to create synthetics that would kill you, so we made a bunch of synthetics to kill you before you made a bunch of synthetics that would kill you.

 

[Synthetics that periodically kill sapient organics] is very different from [synthetics that kill all organic life and stick around].

[Iakus]

[Synthetics that periodically kill sapient organics] is very different from [synthetics that kill all organic life and stick around].

Something which obviously has never happened.  Even before the Reapers.

[Vazgen]

 

All the Leviathans reveal is they are the ones who created "the intelligence" and why. 

 

And again, by your logic, their information is useless too, since they are the descendants of those Leviathans.  So all they have is hearsay as well.

You seem to misunderstand my logic. It is not to trust implicitly only one source (especially biased), it's to search for at least one another account.

 

I find the whole synthetic vs. organic angle very simplistic.  Along with the evolution of AI technology, so too will be the advancement of biology and genetics, and integrating synthetic parts and processes into living beings.  By the time synthetic beings come around, humans and synthetics will be more alike than people think.  And it's also a fallacy to say that something completely synthetic is just going to be vastly superior to anything biological.  There is nothing more complex or adaptable than biology.  Having harnessed the power of genetic engineering, humans may one day evolve themselves into something superior than any synthetic creation.  And then you can make the same Reaper-like argument.  You might have a race of super humans living among regular humans, the super humans and regular humans come into conflict and regular humans get wiped out.

The thing with ME universe is that the mass relays and Citadel provide a jump in technology for organics. So Reapers are in fact one of the reasons of the problem. But, you see, being an AI, they can's simply destroy themselves and hope for the best. They want to create a society in a controlled environment that overcomes that problem of organic/synthetic conflict and is strong enough to defend itself and use the Crucible.

[themikefest]

To some people "conventional victory"="anything that's not space magic"

 

But the problem with the Reapers is Bioware decided that the galaxy is invaded by roughly 200,000 Soverign-class Reapers and perhaps as many as a million destroyers.  If there was any logic to the game at all, a "Game OVer" screen should have flashed as soon as the Reapers hit Earth.

Don't know where the 200 000 number comes from. There is no indication that every cycle was 50 000 years. I wouldn't be surprised if the first few cycles took a lot longer than 50 000 years since at the beginning, the relays and Citadel had to be built to make the cycles more efficient. And until there's an actual number of reapers ships, I'm not going to believe  they have thousands.

[teh DRUMPf!!]

The krogan commited wars of genocide, including dropping rocks on garden worlds.  They are less reliant on those very resources, which is what made them so effective in the rachni wars.

 

Oh, yeah, the rachni, whom the krogan did drive to extinction (barring that one egg)

 

This is funny because the krogan's goal was merely to allow their population to expand, not to wipe out the entire species of those that opposed them, but let's say they would have done so. That is an undesirable fate for everyone not krogan (most people), and any krogan that value life apart from their own species. It is a problem, and not the good kind. How, as a policymaker assigned to finding some solution, do you solve this problem without mass-murder or biological-alteration (or both, ala genophage)? Assume that the krogan will not be stopped through conventional military means (same assumption made of the Krogan Rebellions without the genophage).

 

Another hypothetical: without the existence of a species more powerful (in any way... physically, militarily, technologically, etc.) than the krogan, there is no one to stop the krogan from wiping out all species. True? Imagine, now, that the krogan develop an AI more powerful than themselves. Who will stop the AI from following in their makers' footsteps? Unless mistakes are made, no one. So the question is, how do you prevent this outcome from taking place without preemptive measures towards the AI, the organic species that created them, or both?

 

 

To reply to your post, though, it's evident that krogan resilience made them the strong and the most effective species in combat. Apply that idea to synthetics, and you concede that they would be even more effective since they have even fewer needs. However, one species was still stronger than the krogan, on an intellectual level. The salarians stopped the krogan with a bioweapon. Now again apply that to synthetics, species which can develop brainpower well beyond organic limits. It's both of these things that make their kind vastly more dangerous than organics, and why conflict with them is more severe than those between organics.

 

By all accounts, the rachni were not giving anyone any choice but to kill them all. Then again, they were thralls to another, more hostile species.

[teh DRUMPf!!]

Something which obviously has never happened.  Even before the Reapers.

 

That's because the Reapers made such an event impossible. Would it have happened without them? We will never know.

 

Before the Reapers, Leviathan made it impossible, but Leviathan was just the organic version of what the Catalyst was tasked with protecting organics against -- an entity too great and powerful for organics to defeat.

[Iakus]

Don't know where the 200 000 number comes from. There is no indication that every cycle was 50 000 years. I wouldn't be surprised if the first few cycles took a lot longer than 50 000 years since at the beginning, the relays and Citadel had to be built to make the cycles more efficient. And until there's an actual number of reapers ships, I'm not going to believe  they have thousands.

 

It does come from approximating a cycle every 50,000 years.  Granted a given cycle may be longer, but may be shorter as well.

 

I am also assuming one billion years as a starting point, given that's how old the Leviathan of Dis was.  And we know that's not the oldest Reaper.  So the cycles were actually going on longer than that

 

I'm also assuming five destroyers being masde per cycle.  Which is pretty conservative, I think.

 

But at any rate, that 's why I said "roughly" 200,000 Sovereigns.