63 réponses à ce sujet

[dreamgazer]

Maybe they all agreed on it universally?

Every "independent" Reaper ever created?

[Morty Smith]

Every "independent" Reaper ever created?

 

We don´t have much to go on to determine how a single reaper actually functions. It´s all over the place. But why would a reaper even need the ability to speak if he can order and even impose order onto others without doing so? And everytime a reaper spoke it made a statement and in Sovereigns case even gave an opinion.

 

Maybe the complexity of the reaper code an the fact that it made the geth into individuals is the only real evidence in the story to go by.

 

We also don´t know about the state every cycle was in. Maybe there were rebel-reapers or defectors that got cleaned up like the rest of the galaxy.

 

Edit: Aww man, how cool would it have been to actually discover and raise your own reaper-reaper fleet.

[dreamgazer]

But they all hang out in dark space until the next harvest, like tools locked up in a shed.

[Morty Smith]

But they all hang out in dark space until the next harvest, like tools locked up in a shed.

 

When I was in kindergarten, we had to take a nap every afternoon.

 

Okay, bad example. But I guess reapers might have to conserve energy or maybe they don´t just lie there.

I still hold on to the thought that they might check on other galaxies in between 50K years, but that was never stated.

 

billions of years would be enough time for organic life or even another artificial intelligence to rise in another galaxy and given traveling via the mass-effect was discovered in a span of one or a few cycles it would be a possibility that other galaxies had to be checked on. Maybe ME4 touches on that.

[sH0tgUn jUliA]

There is no dissent among the Reapers. Starbrat saw to that. "I control the Reapers."

 

Harbinger (to the new Reapers): You are each a nation, independent, free of all weakness.

 

Starbrat (behind the scenes):

[dreamgazer]

When I was in kindergarten, we had to take a nap every afternoon.

Who's the Reapers' teacher?

[GalacticWolf5]

Who's the Reapers' teacher?

The Catalyst.

[Morty Smith]

Who's the Reapers' teacher?

 

I guess the program (catalyst). Maybe reapers are both independent and controlled by a hive-mind, like sovereign stated "we are each a nation". They might be independent until someone assumes direct control.

[Valmar]

Every "independent" Reaper ever created?

 

Shrug. I never claimed the lore was perfect. I'm not even sure why this line of questioning came up, honestly. Does it have a relevance to the topic that I'm missing out on?

 

 

Who's the Reapers' teacher?

 

The catalyst.

[dreamgazer]

There is no dissent among the Reapers. Starbrat saw to that. "I control the Reapers."
 
Harbinger (to the new Reapers): You are each a nation, independent, free of all weakness.
 
Starbrat (behind the scenes):

You're independent! ... so long as you hibernate with the rest of us, and follow a set cycle of extermination, and impose order on the chaos of organic evolution. I've always seen the Reapers' independence with quotation marks.

[Morty Smith]

You're independent! ... so long as you hibernate with the rest of us, and follow a set cycle of extermination, and impose order on the chaos of organic evolution. I've always seen the Reapers' independence with quotation marks.

 

If it´s either that or termination, how independent would a regular soldier be? We never explored the psyche or possible psyche of a reaper.

 

Maybe you´re right and the writers just tossed the notion of them being more than simple tools out of the window and given the comparison to fire, ... I just gave up.

 

They´re just lawnmowers with installed trailer-pattern speech.

[dreamgazer]

Shrug. I never claimed the lore was perfect. I'm not even sure why this line of questioning came up, honestly. Does it have a relevance to the topic that I'm missing out on?

It's mostly a response to the suggestion that a Reaper overlord, controller, or architect is an alien concept dropped on the audience in the ending. I don't agree.

[Valmar]

It's mostly a response to the suggestion that a Reaper overlord, controller, or architect is an alien concept dropped on the audience in the ending. I don't agree.

 

You're free to disagree. I think you're wrong, but you're still free to disagree.

[God]

You may like it, but you liking it doesn't make it objectively good.  Also, way to assume you know how I think.  God could you be any more arrogant? So because YOU prefer it that makes it alright?   If winning means pulling some magical unicorn out of your buttocks, that is no better than a conventional victory. Also, there was DEM in ME 3.  Starbrat is the prime example of DEM.  Starbrat appeared out of nowhere in the last 10 minutes of the game.  An entity we had no clue even existed for the entirety of the ME saga up until that point.  He appeared seemingly out of thin air, offered the three-fold solution (Suicide A, Suicide B, Suicide C) and then magically solved the Organics versus Synthetics conflict through his mere existence, as well as his machinations, whether direct or indirect.  Shepard was merely a puppet of the Starbrat at this point.  If you think that isn't the epitome of DEM, I don't know what to tell you.  That is, to the letter, the exact definition of DEM.  Down to the molecule.   

 

I never said it did. You not liking it doesn't make it objectively bad, so you're a hypocrite for implying so.

 

I do know how you think. You demonstrate it here. You hate the ending, you have a tendency to attack people who like it, and you get upset when people retort, counter, or respond in a way you don't like and accuse them of harrassing/trolling/whatever you.

 

There was no DEM in ME3. The Catalyst did not offer any solutions, it presented solutions to us that we ourselves created. If anything, Shepard is the DEM to the Catalyst. 

 

I know what to tell you. You don't know what a DEM is, or are intentionally skewing the meaning of the term into something negative to create a justification for you dislike of the ending.

 

In fact, I listed why the ending to ME3 wasn't a DEM.

[dreamgazer]

You're free to disagree. I think you're wrong, but you're still free to disagree.

That's fine. Nothing about the Reapers' uniform cycle and hibernation patterns suggested independence to me, though.

I see obedience, and always have. "To what" was always the question in the back of my mind.

[Morty Smith]

That's fine. Nothing about the Reapers' uniform cycle and hibernation patterns suggested independence to me, though.

I see obedience, and always have. "To what" was always the question in the back of my mind.

 

So then we have A.I that isn´t really A.I that is controlled by a bigger A.I that isn´t really able to control them, cause he can´t even stop the process to talk to shepard?

[dreamgazer]

So then we have A.I that isn´t really A.I that is controlled by a bigger A.I that isn´t really able to control them, cause he can´t even stop the process to talk to shepard?

Why would he stop the process? Unless the Reapers can also freeze time, there isn't going to be a ceasefire moment.

We have A.I. on a leash.

[Morty Smith]

Why would he stop the process? Unless the Reapers can also freeze time, there isn't going to be a time-out moment.

We have A.I. on a leash.

 

He claims to control the reapers. They are the process. Why would he need to stop time? Even if they stop in their tracks, what damage would they take with working shields? What is the reasoning behind his lack of time?

[Valmar]

There was no DEM in ME3. The Catalyst did not offer any solutions, it presented solutions to us that we ourselves created. If anything, Shepard is the DEM to the Catalyst. 

 

I know what to tell you. You don't know what a DEM is, or are intentionally skewing the meaning of the term into something negative to create a justification for you dislike of the ending.

 

In fact, I listed why the ending to ME3 wasn't a DEM.

 

I just want to point out that a lot of your posts tend to make to view the ending from perspectives I had not considered before. I appreciate that. I've actually never thought too deeply on the whole proposed DEM aspect of the ending and generally just went with the general consensus on the forums which has people always accusing it of such. Mob mentality, I know. Still, you made me look at it more closely and see it in a new light. It certainly doesn't change my issues with the ending as a whole, mind you, but it does remove one complaint I had. Which is always a good thing, as I don't actually derive any pleasure from disliking the ending. It's also always a pleasure to see that there are individuals on the forums who do more than just sprout on about how much they hate things and how it should have been this way and that.

[dreamgazer]

Even if they stop in their tracks, what damage would they take with working shields?

Depends on how long they're just sitting there.

Better question: what incentive does the Catalyst have to do so in the first place?

[angol fear]

I never said it did. You not liking it doesn't make it objectively bad, so you're a hypocrite for implying so.

 

I do know how you think. You demonstrate it here. You hate the ending, you have a tendency to attack people who like it, and you get upset when people retort, counter, or respond in a way you don't like and accuse them of harrassing/trolling/whatever you.

 

There was no DEM in ME3. The Catalyst did not offer any solutions, it presented solutions to us that we ourselves created. If anything, Shepard is the DEM to the Catalyst. 

 

I know what to tell you. You don't know what a DEM is, or are intentionally skewing the meaning of the term into something negative to create a justification for you dislike of the ending.

 

In fact, I listed why the ending to ME3 wasn't a DEM.

 

I agree with you (glad to see that some people didn't follow the haters line and tried to read properly the game). But I would like to add something about the writing. Actually the writing of mass effect 3 and mostly the ending is based on how the player would receive that part, his expectations etc... A lot of people think that the A.I. is a Deus ex machina because it appears only in the end.

First, that's not true because the game makes Shepard's dreams ambiguous (the kid can be seen as the A.I. so that's why they, Shepard and the A.I., burn in the last part of the dream sequence). The A.I. appears before the ending.

Second, because, a deus ex machina is an external intervention (god in antic writing, events that change everything in the writing after antiquity), the A.I. is the reason why there are the cycles, it is internal, not external. Moreover, it doesn't change anything, it's Shepard who makes the choice and solves the problem.

Third, the purpose of a deus ex machina is to create a happy end. That's why it has been criticized : it isn't coherent, it doesn't care about coherence because its purpose isn't about it it's just happy end! Mass Effect 3 doesn't have bad end or happy end. The purpose of a deus ex machina is to please people, but mass effect ending wasn't written to please people (it was written to be consistent).

 

But Bioware wanted to create a deus ex machina aspect to that. People felt that the ending is disconnected because it is actually really surprising. The ending wants to break with the main point of view, the ending was about high level. Because of the high level, the A.I. gives an impression of a god. And it actually have the place of god in the universe. So there's something about the original Deus ex machina that is created, and bioware wanted it.

 

So bioware wanted to create an impression of deus ex machina with something that isn't one, actually.

 

Edit : Actually, the writing of the ending is based on paradox. That's why it is and it is not a deus ex machina. The whole writing is about paradox that's why most people here could not get it. That's why most people think that it's a deus ex machina, and that's why there's so many things they don't understand.

[Esthlos]

You'll forgive me if I don't separate every little quote.
[...]

You made very good points... maybe it is simplier to just rewrite my first post accounting for them rather than to address them singularly:

(P.S. I'm using MEHEM, thank you!
I also give up on the idea of modding the game...
What follows is more of a "what I'd like to do if it was possible to mod the game this much"...)

The run to the beam fails: the Reapers shut it down just as Shepard came to see it.
But all is not lost: taking advantage of the distraction provided by Shepard (who seems to easily attract quite a bit of interest and attention from the Reapers, as Harbringer showed in ME2) taking down the destroyer, a small squad led by Anderson actually managed to enter it.

The player is given control of Shepard, and has to survive wave after wave of Reaper reinforcements with a few unnamed soldiers and all the allies s/he brought there; this time, though, no "revives": those who die do so for real. Wrex enters blood rage mode and goes berserk before being taken down, Liara goes down with a fiery biotic explosion, and so on; these are not cutscenes: the player can ignore them, or stop fighting to watch them (and thus risking to lose more companions).
While this battle goes on (the number of unnamed soldiers and the number of hostiles per wave depends on the EMS), Shepard follows Anderson's progress through radio contact. EDI notes how the signal is coming from a previously unknown part of the Citadel.

Anderson's squad finds resistance, but manages to move forward despite the losses; moment of rejoying when he confirms he reached what seem to be the Crucible's controls - but the radio contact is suddenly lost (Anderson is captured by TIM and immobilized, like in the EC, which prevents him from using his comm anymore), and the Crucible still obviously didn't work.

"We lost? This can't end here. It won't! Shepard, we need to get those controls."

Hackett decides to go for a desperate move: he'll try to open a way for a small squad led by Shepard to board the Citadel. Sending more people is considered, but this is a desperate move and according to Hackett the Reapers probably know it: the Reapers have to believe that they are trying to destroy the Citadel in a last attempt to slow down the Harvesting by taking down the centre of the Relay system.

(Since the Reapers are not firing on the Crucible they might not know the danger it poses, and sending too many people might make it evident that they are trying to board the Citadel, not to destroy it)

The rest of the surviving companions will stay on Earth, and will survive similarly to those watching Shepard's back in ME2 (survive only if strong enough as a group, the first ones to die are those with the least military expertise).

Hackett orders the whole fleet to open fire on the Citadel; sure, it can withstand weeks of fire from a single weapon, but here it's being fired upon by a whole fleet. If the EMS is high enough, they manage to rip a whole; if not, Hackett rams his own flagship into the weakened Citadel arm.

Shepard and his/her team, thanks to the chaos of battle, fly nearly unnoticed to the Citadel, and board it near where they lost contact with Anderson.

Depending on the Citadel defence war asset, Shepard may find impossibly strong resistance, or just high resistance.
Upon reaching the room where they lost contact with Anderson, Shepard decides to leave his/her squad behind: sure, s/he might need their help, but it's more important that someone watches his/her back and blocks any Reaper reinforcement from breaking through.

Depending on who you brought, on how many Medi-Gels you had left and on the Citadel defence, you have a longer or shorter timer, that always advances except when you're choosing your next conversation option (you can take your time in choosing the topic, but can't talk forever); if it runs out, the conversation is cut and you have to defend yourself.
No possible victory anymore: your team was overrun and killed, and now is only left to see just how many enemies can you take with you before falling.

While this timer runs, you have the Extended Cut meeting with TIM; the only difference is that he captured Anderson and was trying to bring him on the Reapers' side.

If you manage to finish with him before the timer runs out, Shepard uses the console and triggers the platform that brings him/her to the choices' chamber.
Meanwhile, the squad you brought is overrun. If you brought strong supporters, then they go down fighting (for example, again, Liara prefers to go down with a fiery explosion rather than letting herself be captured).
If you brought strong soldiers, then they are captured instead and destined to indoctrination (how is James going to immolate himself with a rifle, after all?).
(EDI goes down fighting but is not killed, as her body doesn't actually host her mind)

Now, it's time to meet the Starchild (who can take any form, doesn't matter).
Differences with the EC version of this meeting:
-the Crucible regularly tries to fire a sort of bolt into the Citadel, but this bolt is physically blocked by some sort of metal plate, connected and kept in place by a single pylon.

-this plate is only shown; the Starchild never mentions it.

-the longer you talk, the more evidently Shepard is showing signs of indoctrination (eyes change, skin color changes, etc). This proceeds faster the lower Shepard's moral meters are (a strong personality is harder to overcome).

-if you talk too long, Shepard automatically accepts the Starchild's words, and throws him/herself out in the Citadel's core.

-when you're done talking, you are presented with four options:
--Refuse, which is presented as the Synthesis option (if the Reapers are organic/synthetic hybrids and the apex of both evolution and development, then conservation of sentient life in Reaper form is the most logical way to achieve Synthesis) (both throwing yourself down in the core and refusing to make a choice trigger this);

--Fake Destroy: you shoot the vanilla tube, and the Crucible self destructs. Congratulations, you're an idiot! Shepard is overrun by Reaper forces, and the Harvesting proceeds.

--Control: you upload yourself in a chamber similar to the one used in the Geth fighter base to interface with the server; in the slideshows, then, it is explained that each Reaper needs a strong personality as a Catalyst for the billions of minds in its "independent nation" to converge in a single psyche and coordinate in a single being/form; the Stachild is just a final test/temporary library that keeps an AI copy of the minds of those that, in each cycle, are worthy enough to manage to reach this point without getting killed nor overcome by indoctrination.

It is also revealed that the Crucible is of Reaper design, and is intended as a test to select those worthy minds that will make excellent Reapers, without them being so much hostile to actually try to Destroy every reaper.

(This would explain why no Reaper ever rebels and tries to fight the others: only those who don't hate the Reapers so much to never consider controlling them instead of destroying them are kept as candidate Reaper catalysts)

(It should also explain why Shepard got that much interest from the Reapers: s/he showed the potential to make an excellent new Reaper Catalyst)
(And also why the Reapers didn't destroy the Crucible or make sure that the next cycle never hears of it, despite it being used multiple times in the past: they want each cycle's races to try to build it!)

(If no worthy minds are found, then it is implied that the unused raw materials deriving from the Harvest are used to make Reaper Destroyers, which are then guided by AIs programmed to serve the Reapers)

--Use the Crucible: you shoot the metal plate without being told to. Maybe an Engineer Shepard might "mentally" comment on it, but the player is not given other hints about this being a feasible choice.
Destroying that plate allows the Crucible to actually work (if the Reapers leaked an obviously useless Crucible, then there was a high risk that the cycle's races wouldn't build it and wouldn't send worthy personalities to the final test in the choice chamber): it fires a bolt in the Citadel, that then spreads through the relay network and, is explained in the finale, fills the galaxy with garbage transmissions and static electricity.

If everything is tech, then nothing is; not detecting any more electrical or biotical peaks, the Reapers assume that the battle is won and every advanced civilization has been harvested, and proceed to retreat in the Dark Space (they are only partially organic, and have no reason to think that their sensors suddenly all stopped working).
(If the fleet kept firing at them they might have noticed something was amiss, but the blast confused every ship's targeting system too so they stopped firing too)

It isn't over yet: now this cycle's races only have 50 000 years to prepare for the next invasion.
Maybe less: they don't know if or when will the Reapers figure out that their leaked semi-useless superweapon actually kinda worked, and for this same reason the cycle's races can't really hope to successfully use the Crucible again when the Reapers come back.

Is it better now?

[Morty Smith]

Depends on how long they're just sitting there.

Better question: what incentive does the Catalyst have to do so in the first place?

 

Because he needs/wants to talk to shepard.

 

If you discount the need/want for him to talk, why even bring shepard up there or why doesnt he just throw him into the beam and gives him choices? As an Intelligence that admits it´s at the end of it´s rope it would be an opportunity to get an outside view and unconceived input to come to a new conclusion.

 

@angol fear: I´ve read the claim that people "don´t get" the implications and meaning of the ending a lot on here. Would you be a vanguard and actually write down what those things are, at least from your perspective?

[sH0tgUn jUliA]

The problem was that there wasn't enough information leading up to this.

 

Xen's post Rannoch mission in the game should never have been dropped from the story, and if it had been put in the game it should have been allowed to show that there is an super AI residing within the Citadel. This quest was to have taken place whether or not her people were destroyed. See Xen escaped. She wants to defeat the Reapers. The problems with putting this quest in the story were the following: 1) it would have had a stupid ending - Shepard under orders from the Council would have had to stop her from conducting illegal AI experiments. 2) Xen uses science and we know from the game that science comes from the tree of knowledge and thus is evil. It also made Xen look not as crazy as everyone thought. She saw how desperate the situation really was and was willing to do anything to defeat the reapers. And 3) everyone was a bunch of idiots for believing that the Citadel was sitting there in space all those thousands of years in perfect conditions without some kind of AI running the damned thing, and they really would have looked DUMB. The "Good is dumb" trope would have been overplayed. 4) there would have been no follow up on her work because it would have ruined Mac's A, B, or C ending had they found the thing.

 

Xen was the only sane one of the bunch.

 

There was sufficient information leading up to control. The Illusive Man was beating us over the head with it.

 

There was no information leading up to synthesis, and before someone says that if you made peace between the quarians and geth you got that when the geth uploaded into the suits of the quarians, that wasn't enough. And before someone says that if you played ME2 and listened to Legion discuss the reaper gestalt consciousness, that definitely wasn't the same thing. And before someone says something about Javik's discussions - that was optional DLC dropped from the game for BW to make an extra $10 off for Day One DLC and as such does not count because it was obviously determined that we didn't need it to understand the ending.

 

You don't drop a bomb like that in the end and expect the player to make a leap of faith without a plot buildup to that point. Where is it ever mentioned that synthetics need to understand organics, and that organics need synthetics? We could have gone through that entire story without EDI. Yes it could have been written. Shepard could have not been killed at the beginning of ME2 and not received a bunch of synthetic implants. Being part synthetic doesn't mean you need synthetics.

 

But I do understand that Shepard had to die and be rebuilt - this was so that Shepard would be prepared to handle the Blight. This was typical Bioware. Shepard had to have something different - be partly synthetic - you know have the taint of the darkspawn - for when the darkspawn err... reapers invaded Shepard could slay err... talk with the archdemon on top of the Citadel.

 

Do something different next time, writers. Please.

[prosthetic soul]

I never said it did. You not liking it doesn't make it objectively bad, so you're a hypocrite for implying so.

 

I do know how you think. You demonstrate it here. You hate the ending, you have a tendency to attack people who like it, and you get upset when people retort, counter, or respond in a way you don't like and accuse them of harrassing/trolling/whatever you.

 

There was no DEM in ME3. The Catalyst did not offer any solutions, it presented solutions to us that we ourselves created. If anything, Shepard is the DEM to the Catalyst. 

 

I know what to tell you. You don't know what a DEM is, or are intentionally skewing the meaning of the term into something negative to create a justification for you dislike of the ending.

 

In fact, I listed why the ending to ME3 wasn't a DEM.

Once again, you are lying to bolster your already shaky foundation on which your fallacious argument stands.  Also, lol at you thinking you know what I think.  Sure you do buddy.  Sure you do.  I think your username has gone to your head there bucko.