104 réponses à ce sujet

[Linkenski]

Pre-face: some ramblings down below. Deal. With. It. 

 

I don't think the Catalyst should be introduced earlier on. I'm actually fine with him just being in the ending... there is vague foreshadowing and mystery. He doesn't completely come out of nowhere, although I do understand it's a pretty bad thing to introduce the character in person at the 11th hour... but I'm one of those morons who thought the Architect scene in the Matrix was amazing.

 

What I would've really liked to have seen in the plot was some examples that prove the Reapers' viewpoint, so we know early on that "synthetics vs organics" is a very central thing. I've thought about possible scenarios since I beat the game that I think should've been in it, although I mostly come up short or realize that it falls apart somewhere everytime I get an idea.

 

The Reaper on Rannoch foreshadows the ending but I have yet to talk to someone who saw the "synthetics vs organics" theme coming at the end, because when Shepard talks to the Rannoch Reaper about synthetics not having to kill organics it seems illogical and lacks context so personally I just ignored it because there wasn't any connection between the what was visible in the text and what was being hinted at.

 

However, I did begin thinking up ways and reasons for Reapers to "kill everybody to save them". Synthetics killing all organics was nowhere in the text at this point, so I never thought of that, naturally but I was actually closer than I thought.

 

My theory before the ending was that advanced species, in general, would outgrow the galaxy as if and the more they expanded the more dangerous and hostile their relations would eventually become because of the diversity, cultural differences etc. it had formed a pattern of war that inevitably ended up in total destruction. That's just kind of an outline idea and I already see where it falls apart, because again the text of ME3: Uniting all species to fight a common enemy -- it just doesn't show that idea I was talking about happened... and sadly it does not really do so with the theme Bioware chose either.

 

For the theme to work well, I think we would've needed it foreshadowed in ME2 like the Dark Energy stuff and Haestrom, and that's another reason why ME3 would've probably been better with Drew K helming it and continuing the concept of Dark Energy as a central theme running alongside the war-plot in ME3, and perhaps using Cerberus as the splinter-group they were in ME2 and not the armada they suddenly became.

 

 

 

TL;DR: It's clear ME3 would've needed a rewrite to work really well in how it incorporates the Catalyst... but I don't think putting him in the beginning would've worked too well either... exemplifying what he asserts earlier on is the context we needed. Leviathan sort of added that but then again, that's just one DLC campaign and not an overarching theme in the game which it should've been to my literary optics.

 

Inb4 "saying something isn't there doesn't actually make it so, derp"

[ArabianIGoggles]

I think it'd be nice to have some mention of a reaper "master" before the ending.  The Leviathan DLC fills that role nicely, IMO.

[DanishGambit]

Maybe if the Catalyst was some remnant of the Eden Prime beacon it might've worked. If instead of the kid he had flashbacks of other civilizations failing and got hints from that it wouldn't be as jarring when he got to the Citadel. They could explain them as repressed memories and Dr. Chakwas would have more stuff to do.

[Linkenski]

I think it'd be nice to have some mention of a reaper "master" before the ending.  The Leviathan DLC fills that role nicely, IMO.

You weren't paying attention. I caught it on my first playthrough back in march 2012, that's for sure:

 

http://youtu.be/U_6-x3qbwMo?t=4m49s

 

I'll be a good guy and repeat it for the sake of everyone's convenience

 

 

Context: Shepard and co. talk to Prothean VI about the Reaper Cycle on Thessia:

VI: Our studies of past ages led us to believe that time is cyclical. Many patters repeat.

Shepard: Like the Reaper attacks.

VI: And beyond. The same peaks of evolution, the same valleys of dissolution. The same conflicts are expressed in every cycle but in a different manner. The repetition is too prevalent to be merely chance.

Liara: We assumed the reapers were responsible for the pattern.

VI: Perhaps. Though, I believe the Reapers are only servants of the pattern. They are not its master

Shepard: So who is the master?

 

 

So this is all well and good. I always liked this scene a lot. The only thing I really, really dislike here is that once again this scene points out flaws in the final 10 minutes of the game. The VI says, by my emphasis, "the same conflicts are expressed in every cycle but in a different manner" and the first thing I think in conjunction with my knowledge of the ending is the Geth and the Quarians because we know the pattern the Reapers are focused on is the pattern of synthetics and organics, and like Vendetta VI says, it's "different in every cycle". As Shepard points out multiple times in both ME2 and ME3 this cycle is different and I believe the Geth and Quarian peace is an example of that difference, which should've been reflected in the ending when it is instead ignored by Shepard.

 

I don't care if the Catalyst ignores it. I always assumed his programming makes him virtually distant from reality because he has, like, a singular directive that he just follows and he thinks what he's doing is right, but Shepard... come on! Tell him why his logic is not necessarily representative of the truth for this cycle. It's right there in front of you.

[Valmar]

What I would've really liked to have seen in the plot was some examples that prove the Reapers' viewpoint, so we know early on that "synthetics vs organics" is a very central thing. I've thought about possible scenarios since I beat the game that I think should've been in it, although I mostly come up short or realize that it falls apart somewhere everytime I get an idea.

 

The Reaper on Rannoch foreshadows the ending but I have yet to talk to someone who saw the "synthetics vs organics" theme coming at the end, because when Shepard talks to the Rannoch Reaper about synthetics not having to kill organics it seems illogical and lacks context so personally I just ignored it because there wasn't any connection between the what was visible in the text and what was being hinted at.

 

The main story of the first game had Shepard focus almost exclusively on fighting geth, synthetics. To stop reapers, also synthetics, from coming back and harvesting the galaxy. The geth, synthetics, wiped out 99% of the quarian, organic, population. EDI, synthetic, gains self-awareness and kills a bunch of alliance troops, organic. AI on the citadel, synthetic, wants to join the geth, synthetic, and tries to kill Shepard and squad, organics.

 

ME2 has multiple missions where you have to stop synthetics that have killed a bunch of organics. Mainly the geth but some others aswell.

 

ME3 has the geth, synthetics, siding with the reapers, also synthetics and going to war killing the quarian's, organics. They can even potentially wipe them out and make their species go extinct.

 

No one had to see a synthetic vs organics theme coming at the end, it was a theme they could see in the story since the very beginning. This conflict has always been a theme in the Mass Effect series.

 

Synthetics killing all organics was nowhere in the text at this point, so I never thought of that, naturally but I was actually closer than I thought.

 

 

That's true. Though I'd argue the catalyst is being taken more literal than it should be in this regard. After all, it was only told to us (outside the catalyst) that the synthetics turned on the creators and wiped them out. Not that that they went and destroyed ALL organic life. Though again I think we're taking it a bit more literal than we should. It just means all organics will eventually create synthetics which will eventually wipe them out. Not that one particular set of synthetics will wipe out all other organic life.

 

The reason synthetics will wipe out all organic life is because all advanced organic life  eventually creates synthethics that turn on them and wipe them out. Though that's just my speculation - maybe it is to be taken literally. Though taking it literal seems to bring more headache than is required.

 

 

My theory before the ending was that advanced species, in general, would outgrow the galaxy as if and the more they expanded the more dangerous and hostile their relations would eventually become because of the diversity, cultural differences etc. it had formed a pattern of war that inevitably ended up in total destruction. That's just kind of an outline idea and I already see where it falls apart, because again the text of ME3: Uniting all species to fight a common enemy -- it just doesn't show that idea I was talking about happened... and sadly it does not really do so with the theme Bioware chose either.
 

 

Funny, I thought something similar. Actually I would have preferred that, myself. I don't see how Shepard uniting the species to fight the reapers would hurt it, though. A temporary unity between factions does not mean that future war is impossible. I sincerely doubt the reaper war will be the last war or conflict our cycles sees. Though still I wouldn't have went with a "total destruction" agenda, in hindsight, since so many people seem to get hung up on the idea of such absolutes.

 

Simpler to view the reapers as a "cleansing" that gives way for new life to grow and flourish. Afterall, I doubt humanity or any of the current races would had gotten a chance if the leviathan or protheans were still around.

 

 

For the theme to work well, I think we would've needed it foreshadowed in ME2 like the Dark Energy stuff and Haestrom, and that's another reason why ME3 would've probably been better with Drew K helming it and continuing the concept of Dark Energy as a central theme running alongside the war-plot in ME3, and perhaps using Cerberus as the splinter-group they were in ME2 and not the armada they suddenly became.

 

 

Synthetic-organic conflict was present in the entire trilogy and played a far more significant role than the Dark Energy stuff which was only ever mentioned in brief passing. Dark Energy certainly wasn't prevalent enough in the story to be considered a "central theme" even if ME3 carried on with it.

 

Also, derp.
 

[Valmar]

Well that's quite a caricature. Mass effect is complex but the complexity should never be seen? People should be able to see Mass effect like a stupid game? That is your opinion, not mine, not Bioware and not anyone who knows what is complexity. Sorry but you don't appreciate the "depth the ending took" :it is the depth that was built from mass effect 1 to mass effect 3, if you don't see how the ending is related to Mass Effect 1, then you don't appreciate the ending. Just like I've said, the ending is the essence of Mass Effect, if you can't see it, then it's because you didn't really played Mass Effect 1 and 2.

 

You're twisting my argument here, Angol. I never said ME1-2 didn't have complexity. I said that the general story of it didn't REQUIRE you to have in-depth knowledge of everything to understand their ending. That doesn't mean it didn't have more depth than many likely realized. It just means that it wasn't necessary for the player to catch it to be able to understand the general idea. The story of ME1-2 definitely had depth, as I clearly said earlier, but the user did not have to follow it understand the ending. A stark contrast to ME3's ending that relishes deeply in the lore.

 

ME3's ending, compared to the first two games, is significantly more deep and requires the player to have specific lore knowledge to really grasp what is going on. It's more confusing than other two games, not because the context to understand it isn't there but because it failed to adequately present it to the player. Even you, with all your love for the ending, should be willing to admit this. Afterall is not the bulk of the people you argue with those who don't understand it? Do you really not realize how confusing the ending can be to those that don't follow the lore or take it all as seriously as you do?

 

The evidence of this confusion is all around us. We see it daily. Most of the people you end up arguing with on here are such examples. I'm surprised you're even arguing about this, honestly. Where is that rally I'm suppose to have?! Ironically, I'm actually arguing that the complexity SHOULD BE SEEN. They should show it to us, present it to us, lay it out for us at the ending. Don't expect us to piece it all together ourselves, not when the series never asked that of us before to understand the ending.

 

You do nothing but hurt "our" side, you know. I think we can both agree that the "extremist" on the anti-ender side are the worse aspect of any ME3 discussion. Those who's sole purpose in the conversation is to do nothing but sling hate and go to extremes to convey their disgust - to the point of insulting others opinions or make up things to complain about just for the sake of cursing the ending.

 

Yet here you are playing the same role on the opposite side. You insult those who don't adore the ending, you attack their character. You twist their argument into something it wasn't just for the sake of preaching how wonderful the ending is - ironically against someone who doesn't even hate the ending. You're just as bad those extremist on the anti-ending side of the spectrum. 

 

Just who do you think you are to tell me that I don't "really" appreciate the ending? That I didn't play the games? That's completely uncalled for.

 

 

Mass Effect is a place to start like  mass effect 2 is a place to start. That's marketing. Every game is a good place because it is meant to be, otherwise they would not sell. Do you really think you would say the same thing if you were a producer, and you were making a trilogy. Each game is developed to make even new people enjoy the whole story.

 

Not if I really cared any about the story, no. I would say that we made the game as welcoming to newcomers as we could and that those who hop in late will still get the same game as anyone else. I certainly wouldn't say it is the place to start a trilogy, though. That's taking things too far. Mass Effect is more than just a story, its an experience. An experience you cannot truly appreciate if you only play one game. You may still be able to get the same story as everyone else, you may not be missing anything on a content level, but you will be robbing yourself of the full experience.

 

Imo, the only thing to come from saying "its the place to start the trilogy" is to annoy the fans and lie to those who don't know the setup of the trilogy. It's like saying the final Harry Potter is the movie to start the franchise on.

[General TSAR]

It would irritate me a little less. 

[Pasquale1234]

The main story of the first game had Shepard focus almost exclusively on fighting geth, synthetics. To stop reapers, also synthetics, from coming back and harvesting the galaxy. The geth, synthetics, wiped out 99% of the quarian, organic, population. EDI, synthetic, gains self-awareness and kills a bunch of alliance troops, organic. AI on the citadel, synthetic, wants to join the geth, synthetic, and tries to kill Shepard and squad, organics.

ME2 has multiple missions where you have to stop synthetics that have killed a bunch of organics. Mainly the geth but some others aswell.

ME3 has the geth, synthetics, siding with the reapers, also synthetics and going to war killing the quarian's, organics. They can even potentially wipe them out and make their species go extinct.

No one had to see a synthetic vs organics theme coming at the end, it was a theme they could see in the story since the very beginning. This conflict has always been a theme in the Mass Effect series.

Synthetic versus organic is certainly a persistant theme throughout the trilogy - but the idea that synthetics are oh-so-threatening is consistently subverted. Shepard & Co. obliterate plenty of synthetics throughout the trilogy. They're no more threatening than any of the organic merc bands we thump. That's a problem.

By the time we finally meet the Catalyst, we've also learned that the Quarian's reaction to the emergence of sentience in the geth led to their own undoing, and have had the opportunity to get them to kiss and make-up with those peace-loving geth, who stand ready, able, and willing to help the Quarians re-settle on Rannoch.

It's pretty hard to believe the Catalyst's assertions on the topic when what we've actually seen in-game does not support it.

It became a huge writing challenge since they hadn't planned ahead. They apparently felt the need to present some synthetics in a sympathetic light, and I think they succeeded with EDI and the geth. The only in-game example of the created destroying their creators were the reapers themselves.


ETA: Actually, I'm starting to disagree with my own statement about synthetics versus organics being a persistent theme. All but a few of the struggles could have just as easily been organic versus organic, random mook versus random mook.

[Valmar]

Synthetic versus organic is certainly a persistant theme throughout the trilogy - but the idea that synthetics are oh-so-threatening is consistently subverted. Shepard & Co. obliterate plenty of synthetics throughout the trilogy. They're no more threatening than any of the organic merc bands we thump. That's a problem.

 

True, the small faction we face aren't much of a threat. Though Shepard is the hero and can later headbutt krogan, kill thershermaws, punch yahg, defeat reapers on foot and so on and so forth. The geth exterminated 99% of the quarian population. Thats kinda significant. The geth do pose a threat. The fact that Shepard and crew mow through them like a knife through butter isn't exactly the norm. He's a special exception, what with his amazing Badass Rule of Cool powers. The reapers pose a threat too but if you based it solely off of Shepard and crew you'd think they were all push-overs since he's wiping out entire battalions of their ground units without breaking a sweat, surviving reaper blasts and blowing them up with laser guns.

 

Regardless, its a theme in the whole trilogy, as you admit. That was my only argument, to counter the accusation that the theme was only brought up at the end or that Dark Energy was or could have been a central theme in comparison to synthetic-organic conflict.

 

 

By the time we finally meet the Catalyst, we've also learned that the Quarian's reaction to the emergence of sentience in the geth led to their own undoing, and have had the opportunity to get them to kiss and make-up with those peace-loving geth, who stand ready, able, and willing to help the Quarians re-settle on Rannoch.
 

 

True though I wouldn't personally call the geth "peace-loving" given their record of genocide. However this does nothing to change the fact that the conflict exists. The geth did wipe out 99% of the quarians and even joined the reapers and potentially wipe out the quarian species. Cooperation with synthetics has also been a theme since ME2-3. Though to a much lesser degree since it was only EDI and Legion. Anyway, my argument isn't nor ever was that synthetic-organic conflict was the one and only theme present in Mass Effect. It had quite a few themes. Cooperation was one of them. Though so was synthetic-organic conflict. Which was the only point I was trying to make, again to counter the claim that the conflict theme was never present until the ending.

 

 

It's pretty hard to believe the Catalyst's assertions on the topic when what we've actually seen in-game does not support it.
 

 

I disagree, I see a lot of things supporting it with nothing disproving it other than emotional-driven philosophy.

 

 

It became a huge writing challenge since they hadn't planned ahead. They apparently felt the need to present some synthetics in a sympathetic light, and I think they succeeded with EDI and the geth. The only in-game example of the created destroying their creators were the reapers themselves.

 

I agree it was a challenge and that they wanted to sprinkle butterflies on the machines. They went overboard in my opinion, though. If anything I'd argue that the "the geth are so loving and innocent and the quarians are so mean and vindictive" approach they took undermined the lore and didn't suit it. It felt, to me, again this is just my opinion, that they tried way too hard to make the quarians the evil monsters and the geth these poor mistreated, misunderstood creatures of love and kindness. It was so one-sided it made be a bit nauseous.

 

It's amusing, in hindsight, how well that approach seemed to work though considering how many people seem to completely overlook the fact that the geth sided with the reapers during the war and are now running around with reaper upgrades. Oh, but its okay that they sided with the reapers, because those darn quarians, grrr! Geth are love, geth are peace. Friendship hugs, tee-hee! Congratulations Legion now you're a real boy! May the blue fairy bless you all.

 

Yeah, I'm bitter about it. Lol.

 

 

The only in-game example of the created destroying their creators were the reapers themselves.

 

Is 99% of the quarian population really so insignificant that it shouldn't be filed in the "created destroying their creators" section?

 

I mean, if that doesn't count because a meager handful are left alive then the reaper's didn't wipe out the protheans since a couple scientists survived. Hell, why even include the reapers in this? A few leviathan survived the reaper harvest. So if only a few surviving means it cannot be classified as "destroying their creators" then not even the reapers can be called an example of this.

 

Speaking of the protheans what about the species that were wiped out by synthetic's in Javik's cycle? Or the millions, perhaps billions of years worth that the Leviathan's observed? The ones the Catalyst observed? Are these really all wrong? Should we really ignore the geth, the protheans, the leviathans and the catalyst? We're ignoring a lot of lore here just for the sake of saying there is no examples.

 

Accepting that there are examples in the lore doesn't mean you have to be happy with the ending or the direction it took. Take for example those who act like the conflict only came up at the ending. Its fine to take issue with the fact that they decided to focus on that specific issue in the ending but that doesn't mean it just manifested itself at the ending. People can voice displeasure about something without warping the facts.

[dreamgazer]

Is 99% of the quarian population really so insignificant that it shouldn't be filed in the "created destroying their creators" section?

Apparently so.

[Pasquale1234]

True, the small faction we face aren't much of a threat. Though Shepard is the hero and can later headbutt krogan, kill thershermaws, punch yahg, defeat reapers on foot and so on and so forth. The geth exterminated 99% of the quarian population. Thats kinda significant. The geth do pose a threat. The fact that Shepard and crew mow through them like a knife through butter isn't exactly the norm. He's a special exception, what with his amazing Badass Rule of Cool powers. The reapers pose a threat too but if you based it solely off of Shepard and crew you'd think they were all push-overs since he's wiping out entire battalions of their ground units without breaking a sweat, surviving reaper blasts and blowing them up with laser guns.

Part of what I'd like to convey - but am not doing a very good job thus far - is that some of the synthetic versus organic conflict we see in the game could have just as easily been organic versus organic. The game doesn't do much to show us that synthetics pose a higher degree of threat.

The geth that supported Saren may just as well have been hired (or indoctrinated) mercs. Aside from some comment about them worshipping Sovereign, was there a story reason why Saren's armies needed to be synthetics?

The Presidium AI that had its creator imprisoned could have been any disgruntled employee taking revenge against a boss.

Rogue VI on Luna? Probably one of the better examples, though any buggy software could wreak havoc there, as could an organic hacker.
 

I agree it was a challenge and that they wanted to sprinkle butterflies on the machines. They went overboard in my opinion, though. If anything I'd argue that the "the geth are so loving and innocent and the quarians are so mean and vindictive" approach they took undermined the lore and didn't suit it. It felt, to me, again this is just my opinion, that they tried way too hard to make the quarians the evil monsters and the geth these poor mistreated, misunderstood creatures of love and kindness. It was so one-sided it made be a bit nauseous.

It's amusing, in hindsight, how well that approach seemed to work though considering how many people seem to completely overlook the fact that the geth sided with the reapers during the war and are now running around with reaper upgrades. Oh, but its okay that they sided with the reapers, because those darn quarians, grrr! Geth are love, geth are peace. Friendship hugs, tee-hee! Congratulations Legion now you're a real boy! May the blue fairy bless you all.

Yeah, I'm bitter about it. Lol.

I have to wonder whether it was really worth it. The Quarian's role and position took a helluva beating with that whole storyline. As for the heretic thing - it's another reason why synthetics aren't so scary. If some go bad, reprogram them.
 

Is 99% of the quarian population really so insignificant that it shouldn't be filed in the "created destroying their creators" section?

The extent of Quarian losses in that war would have a lot more impact if it weren't buried in a codex entry. In-game, we're shown a functioning Quarian society, complete with internal political struggles and one of the largest fleets in the galaxy.
 

Speaking of the protheans what about the species that were wiped out by synthetic's in Javik's cycle?

Is that in the From Ashes DLC? I don't have it.
 

Or the millions, perhaps billions of years worth that the Leviathan's observed? The ones the Catalyst observed? Are these really all wrong? Should we really ignore the geth, the protheans, the leviathans and the catalyst? We're ignoring a lot of lore here just for the sake of saying there is no examples.

In the case of the Leviathans and Catalyst, you're really just taking their word for it. I don't recall them relating any specifics, just some vague references. 'Because I said so' is not a very compelling argument.
 

Accepting that there are examples in the lore doesn't mean you have to be happy with the ending or the direction it took. Take for example those who act like the conflict only came up at the ending. Its fine to take issue with the fact that they decided to focus on that specific issue in the ending but that doesn't mean it just manifested itself at the ending. People can voice displeasure about something without warping the facts.

Oh, I see examples of conflict with synthetics throughout the trilogy, but not much that demonstrates synthetics as posing a unique threat. I do see the Leviathans as being a unique case - an arrogant species dependent on enthralling other species. That in itself tells me they are very likely to see things differently than any species alive in the current cycle would.

But I'm still fairly new to the MEU. Just bought the trilogy 3 months ago, so I've not had all that much time yet to roll it around in my brain.

[Valmar]

Part of what I'd like to convey - but am not doing a very good job thus far - is that some of the synthetic versus organic conflict we see in the game could have just as easily been organic versus organic. The game doesn't do much to show us that synthetics pose a higher degree of threat.

 

Its true that they could have been organic. You're not to first to bring that up and I still find it surprising. What does that change, honestly? It's still synthetics fighting organics. The catalyst never said that they get in conflict for one specific reason and that reason alone. It just says they get into conflict. Which they have in ever single case presented in the series. It doesn't matter what caused the conflict or who is the blame or anything of the sort. None of it changes the fact that its still synthetics in conflict with organics. It doesn't matter what side short first or if the machines could be supplemented with Alien Race B.

 

As for synthetics posing a high threat than organics, well, imo that's self-evident. Hell almost all of the sci-fi movies that deal with this like to point out how powerful machines are. They don't sleep, they don't eat, they don't feel your pity or remorse. They can be hundreds of times stronger, more durable, and infinitely smarter than any organic. IMO the biggest stretch sci-fi does with these types of stories is that they usually suggest humanity actually have hope of beating them. They also tend to nerf the machines in strange ways just give the human forces leeway in beating them.

 

Unless we're fighting an army of Johnny Five I don't see how we can hope to really compete. Though that's just my view on it.
 

Beyond that though one thing to consider is the fact that synthetic conflict is a controllable variable. Organics will fight with organics. Its inevitable, can't really be controlled. You can't keep race A from fighting with race B. However synthetics are not natural. They are created by organics. You may not be able to stop organics from killing each other but you certainly can prevent synthetics from killing organics. How? Easy. Don't make synthetics. They are not a natural phenomenon. Long as you keep from making them you don't have to worry about it. You can remove that variable from the table.

 

That's essentially what the reapers do. When a cycle has reached the point where they can create these machines which have been observed through a millions or billions of years to always end up getting in conflict with organics the reapers will swoop in and harvest all advanced life, leaving the younger species alone. The harvest is viewed as preservation to the reapers, they believe they are our salvation. They believe they're the good guys, really. Naturally, we're bound to disagree. That is how they see it though.

 

The geth that supported Saren may just as well have been hired (or indoctrinated) mercs. Aside from some comment about them worshipping Sovereign, was there a story reason why Saren's armies needed to be synthetics?
 

 

The geth wouldn't be hired like mercs. Geth are... it's complicated, okay? Lol.

 

I will probably butcher this but the geth are a very unique form of "AI". They aren't even really AI. They're basically VI. A whole lot of VI programs that link together to gain complexity to reach AI levels. All geth know each other. They know each others thoughts. They accept each other. "We are many eyes looking at the same thing." The geth were contacted by Sovereign and offered a reaper body to upload into. This caused a divide with the geth. Geth share consensus with all other geth. All views are taken in, they know each others thoughts.

 

The majority of the geth believe they should achieve their own future and not accept the reaper's aid. They believe the journey is as important as the destination, basically. A small fraction of them however believe they should accept the reaper's offer. Neither result is an error, both are right. They accepted each others decision and the heretics were allowed to leave. They basically split based around philological differences.

 

The heretic geth revere the reapers, view them as gods and as pinnacle of their own evolution. To appease their gods they obey them and fight for them. The reason given why Sovereign chose the geth specifically is because of the failure of the keepers. It was annoyed at the unpredictability of organics and thought the geth would make a good replacement.

 

The geth are a very fascinating 'people' and I'm probably doing them no justice with my description. Best I can offer is to read up on the wiki page about the geth. It goes into much greater length than I can.

 

 

The Presidium AI that had its creator imprisoned could have been any disgruntled employee taking revenge against a boss.

Rogue VI on Luna? Probably one of the better examples, though any buggy software could wreak havoc there, as could an organic hacker.
 

 

That rogue VI was EDI btw. Just for interesting trivia. The binary message it sends you when you destroy it is screaming HELP HELP HELP HELP. More trivia.

 

Anyway, yes, true, these two could be swapped with organics. Though so could the reapers. Instead of giant sentient starships they could be... well, the Leviathans. Which are basically just organic reapers. Again, the only point I was making is that the conflict is there. These are still examples of synthetics in conflict with organics.

 

 

As for the heretic thing - it's another reason why synthetics aren't so scary. If some go bad, reprogram them.

 

This isn't exactly the easiest thing in the world to do. Especially when you're talking about an entire planet full of them. Though the same argument could perhaps be made for organics. If organics can't stop killing each other why not just indoctrinate the entire population and make them be peaceful. Oh no, here comes the "synthesis, synthesis, synthesis!" haters. Lol.

 

Theoretically you could reprogram them. Theoretically you could reprogram organics too, though. I'm not sure one is necessarily any easier than the other. So while possible in theory the practically of it is in question, imo. The difference between the two is that with AI, unlike organics, reprogramming them might be your only hope for victory. Where as organics you can get victory over in a great many different ways.

 

 

Is that in the From Ashes DLC? I don't have it.
 

 

Yes, that Day-1 DLC Bioware decided wasn't important enough to come with the base game. I mean, its only a prothean squadmate. No biggie.

 

 

In the case of the Leviathans and Catalyst, you're really just taking their word for it. I don't recall them relating any specifics, just some vague references. 'Because I said so' is not a very compelling argument.
 

 

True but the lore is lore. The story presents it as the truth. Assuming they're all lying to us is headcanon. I go with lore, myself.

 

This is hardly the first time the series has done this, though. Lazarus, just for example. How does that work? Just does. You could go through the entire trilogy with a fine comb and find many examples similar to this.

 

Oh, I see examples of conflict with synthetics throughout the trilogy, but not much that demonstrates synthetics as posing a unique threat. I do see the Leviathans as being a unique case - an arrogant species dependent on enthralling other species. That in itself tells me they are very likely to see things differently than any species alive in the current cycle would.
 

 

They're certainly arrogant. I'm also sure they do view things very differently from us lesser species. Though I don't see how any of that could actually influence their observation of the pattern. The pattern isn't exactly complicated: organics races build machines, machines turn on them and wipe them out. They never really said what the cause of it was. Just that the conflict kept happening. That's a simple enough observation that I'm not sure how it could misconstrued by perspective.

 

But I'm still fairly new to the MEU. Just bought the trilogy 3 months ago, so I've not had all that much time yet to roll it around in my brain.

 

I hope you had a pleasant experience throughout. It's my favorite game series.   
 

[Arcian]

Grammar fail, happens!

Gives me an aneurysm every time. Understand my pain.

[ZerebusPrime]

From the moment the demo came out, people were saying that the kid on Earth wasn't real.  That only Shepard ever seemed to react to him.  That the kid ran across impossible distances, survived an unsurvivable explosion, and failed to even act like a kid ("You can't save me." - line delivered flatly in a factual tone).

 

As far as I'm concerned, we did see the "catalyst" at the start of ME3.  I give it about as much trust in the ending as I did in the beginning or in any of the dreams.  Somethin' ain't right with that kid.  Take the third dream sequence to heart: to embrace that kid is to burn.

 

Now, was there a better way to do this?  I'm not sure.  I'd either accentuate the inherent danger of everything Reaper at the end or I'd have to throw out the existing chase dreams and replace them with attempts at telepathic contact to slowly build up a rapport...  Maybe both.  The "star brat" being on the level or Reaper indoctrination being at play would have to be made clearer in any case.

[AlanC9]

You're really pushing IT? Still?

[ImaginaryMatter]

Its true that they could have been organic. You're not to first to bring that up and I still find it surprising. What does that change, honestly? It's still synthetics fighting organics. The catalyst never said that they get in conflict for one specific reason and that reason alone. It just says they get into conflict. Which they have in ever single case presented in the series. It doesn't matter what caused the conflict or who is the blame or anything of the sort. None of it changes the fact that its still synthetics in conflict with organics. It doesn't matter what side short first or if the machines could be supplemented with Alien Race B.

 

I think it's very important. It makes the conflict seem rote and pedestrian which, when standing next to the extreme nature of the Reapers and the cycles as a solution, makes the whole ending feel anti-climatic. The threat never feels like an actual threat, an effective story has to be more than just people expositing information about stuff.

[Esthlos]

Its true that they could have been organic. You're not to first to bring that up and I still find it surprising. What does that change, honestly? It's still synthetics fighting organics. The catalyst never said that they get in conflict for one specific reason and that reason alone. It just says they get into conflict.

Right.
And if the Geth never fought back or never became heretics, it would still apply metaphorically as a conflict between different natures and needs.

This is a problem with vague statements: you can fit everything in them.
Sensitives in our world work this way: they only say vague enough things so that there always is a possible interpretation where they're true.

This though doesn't make it any true that synthetics pose a threat to all organic life; none of the in-game examples ever wiped out even a single organic race, even though they could have done so.

Every rogue AI or VI we meet ends up at most killing those who tried to shut it down and then isolating itself.
EDI ends up as an important crewmate for an organic crew.
The Geth let the Quarians go at the end of the morning war (please stop bringing up that 99% bill schitt, it's strongly implied that many of those casualties were the result of an internal conflict and brutal application of martial law on the part of the Quarians themselves), and after that all they seem to want is to be left alone.
Not even the Reapers go all the way to try and obliterate organic life!

The Catalyst in my opinion bases its conclusions on flawed arguments that come from biased observation and flawed programming.
 

Context: Shepard and co. talk to Prothean VI about the Reaper Cycle on Thessia:
VI: Our studies of past ages led us to believe that time is cyclical. Many patters repeat.
Shepard: Like the Reaper attacks.
VI: And beyond. The same peaks of evolution, the same valleys of dissolution. The same conflicts are expressed in every cycle but in a different manner. The repetition is too prevalent to be merely chance.
Liara: We assumed the reapers were responsible for the pattern.
VI: Perhaps. Though, I believe the Reapers are only servants of the pattern. They are not its master
Shepard: So who is the master?


So this is all well and good. I always liked this scene a lot. The only thing I really, really dislike here is that once again this scene points out flaws in the final 10 minutes of the game.

Right up until meeting the starchild, I always interpreted this scene as a reprisal of the following exchange from Mass Effect 1.

Commander Shepard: Whatever your plan is, it's going to fail. I'll make sure of that.
Sovereign: Confidence born of ignorance. The cycle cannot be broken.
Tali'Zorah nar Rayya: Cycle? What cycle?
Sovereign: The pattern has repeated itself more times than you can fathom. Organic civilizations rise, evolve, advance, and at the apex of their glory they are extinguished. The Protheans were not the first. They did not create the Citadel. They did not forge the mass relays. They mere found them - the legacy of my kind.
Commander Shepard: Why would you construct the mass relays and leave them for someone else to find?
Sovereign: Your civilization is based on the technology of the mass relays. Our technology. By using it, your civilization develops along the paths we desire. We impose order on the chaos of organic life. You exist because we allow it, and you will end because we demand it.

All of this means that each cycle develops in similar ways because the Reapers wanted them to develop along those paths.

Then in the last ten minutes an hologram comes along claiming that this repeating pattern is proof of something general.
The pattern it and its minions are creating. Proof of some general truth for which life has to be harvested.
Right. That's totally not a flawed, biased argument.

What I disliked a lot about that scene on Thessia is the sentence "Though, I believe the Reapers are only servants of the pattern. They are not its master".
It makes sense if you consider that the Reapers' actions also repeat.
It's an awesome metaphor, I liked it very much... until the last 10 minutes.
When it turns out that it was literal.
This is another turn down for me... they had introduced a beautiful metaphorical meaning. The Reapers became part of that repeating pattern... where will this bring us? What will this mean in the end?

Nope, nowhere, nothing. There is a literal master. Who would be safely called an idiot if it was an organic and not clearly a badly programmed intelligence. And meeting that is the climax of the game.
For me, this contributed in making it extremely underwhelming.

I've been using MEHEM for a few playthroughs, but I didn't install it for the happy ending. It doesn't really fit the game, and the hero ultimately dying was expected. What makes that mod an invaluable addition to the game in my opinion is that it keeps the dialogue on Thessia while deleting that literal master and its nonsensical "offers".

And this is also the reason why I'm not willing to even consider buying the Leviathan DLC: I'm not paying more than what the base game costed for something that essentially is an attempt to foreshadow and anticipate that massive let down of an ending character, and that heavily looks like it was designed and released as an afterthought, in response to the fans' outrage.

[WizzyWarlock]

Context: Shepard and co. talk to Prothean VI about the Reaper Cycle on Thessia:
VI: Our studies of past ages led us to believe that time is cyclical. Many patters repeat.
Shepard: Like the Reaper attacks.
VI: And beyond. The same peaks of evolution, the same valleys of dissolution. The same conflicts are expressed in every cycle but in a different manner. The repetition is too prevalent to be merely chance.
Liara: We assumed the reapers were responsible for the pattern.
VI: Perhaps. Though, I believe the Reapers are only servants of the pattern. They are not its master
Shepard: So who is the master?

There's a part right at the end of that, just before Kai Leng appears, where the VI says, "Very well. If you have followed the plans for the Crucible, I will interface with your systems and assist the Catalyst to-".

That confuses me. What is this VI going to be assisting the Catalyst to actually do? Surely the Catalyst doesn't need any assistance, as it's a billion year old AI. I'd really like to know what the ending of that sentence was going to be.

[Valmar]

I think it's very important. It makes the conflict seem rote and pedestrian which, when standing next to the extreme nature of the Reapers and the cycles as a solution, makes the whole ending feel anti-climatic. The threat never feels like an actual threat, an effective story has to be more than just people expositing information about stuff.

 

That's a whole other argument. I was only stating the fact that the conflict is indeed present in all three games. One can argue they didn't express the severity of it enough, to which I disagree since 99% of the quarian race were exterminated by the geth, but its subjective enough I guess. Not sure it should be but whatever.

 

Again remember the context. I was only arguing the fact that the conflict isn't something introduced at the ending. I wasn't arguing that it had to be the focus or that it should be the focus only that it was indeed there throughout the trilogy.

 

 

This though doesn't make it any true that synthetics pose a threat to all organic life; none of the in-game examples ever wiped out even a single organic race, even though they could have done so.
 

 

I admit my bias as a Talimancer but come on. 99% of the population is a significant number. Would you say that the reapers did not wipe out the leviathans or the protheans? Even in ME3 you can witness the geth finish the quarians off. Theres also the race that were wiped out in the prothean time. And the races that were wiped out in the billion years of Leviathan observation. Or the ones the catalyst saw wiped out.

 

 

Every rogue AI or VI we meet ends up at most killing those who tried to shut it down and then isolating itself.
EDI ends up as an important crewmate for an organic crew.
The Geth let the Quarians go at the end of the morning war (please stop bringing up that 99% bill schitt, it's strongly implied that many of those casualties were the result of an internal conflict and brutal application of martial law on the part of the Quarians themselves), and after that all they seem to want is to be left alone.
Not even the Reapers go all the way to try and obliterate organic life!
 

 

Firstly, none of this changes anything. They are still synthetics. Synthetics that killed organics. Thus conflict. That was my only point. How would it be fair, at all, to proclaim the series has no examples of synthethic-organic conflict when you have all these objective facts that prove that there has been conflict? The why does not matter. Who is to blame does not matter. It is conflict, plain and simple. If someone shoots you is it no longer assault since technically it was a bullet that wounded/killed you and not their bare hands? No, its still assault. It's still conflict.

 

Secondly, stop bringing up the fact that the geth exterminated 99% of an organic civilization? Am I on the Citadel right now because the amount of contempt tossed at the quarians is mindboggling. Well, you may not care, but I do. I care that 99% of their species was wiped out. I care that they were nearly made extinct. I guess no argument should be made against the genophage. Afterall, some krogan still exist. Nothing to be said against the rachni wars, afterall one survived. Nothing to say against the reaper harvest, afterall some survived. 99% is a significant number and I don't believe it should be casually waved to the side. Bioware did enough hand-waving as it is.

 

Having 99% of your race wiped out by machines is significant. We shouldn't ignore it just because the geth were merciful enough not to kill them all that day. The geth are not saints. I don't care how much they were covered in sparkles and sunshine in ME3.

 

 

The Catalyst in my opinion bases its conclusions on flawed arguments that come from biased observation and flawed programming.
 
 

 

IMO your argument is far more biased than any observation they made. Like you yourself mentioned, what they claim was vague. Synthetics will turn on their creators. That's it. They didn't specify that it would be for this one reason or the next. They just said the conflict will happen. How can bias change that? How can bias change the fact that the geth, synthetics, practically wiped out the quarians, organic? What kind of bias obscures the fact that this is synthetics in conflict with organics? No matter how you look at it the machines are synthetics and organics are, well, organic. No matter how you look at it conflict is conflict.

 

Though maybe it is possible if you're honestly able to let your bias cause you to hand-wave the fact that 99% of the quarians were wiped out. Your bias is making you ignore the fact that there was, infact, conflict between organic and synthetics just because a measly 1% of the organics survived. You're biasly ignoring the facts because you don't want to believe the catalyst, the reapers, the leviathan or the quarians to be right.

 

"I won't let fear compromise who I am!"

 

 

And this is also the reason why I'm not willing to even consider buying the Leviathan DLC: I'm not paying more than what the base game costed for something that essentially is an attempt to foreshadow and anticipate that massive let down of an ending character, and that heavily looks like it was designed and released as an afterthought, in response to the fans' outrage.

 

That's fine. As long as you accept that it is still lore, regardless of your personal feelings about it.

 

 

There's a part right at the end of that, just before Kai Leng appears, where the VI says, "Very well. If you have followed the plans for the Crucible, I will interface with your systems and assist the Catalyst to-".

That confuses me. What is this VI going to be assisting the Catalyst to actually do? Surely the Catalyst doesn't need any assistance, as it's a billion year old AI. I'd really like to know what the ending of that sentence was going to be.

 

It's very unlikely the VI knows the catalyst is the reaper AI god. Remember he thinks only the citadel is the catalyst.

[Linkenski]

No Valmar, this is again where I think you're not really looking at what's really there. There is a conflict between synthetics and organics in ME3 but there is no conflict that clearly shows synthetics being a genocidal threat, like the catalyst says they are, except for the reapers themselves but they are organic synthetic hybrids and it becomes circular logic to use them as the example that synthetics will always destroy all organics.

[Esthlos]

No Valmar, this is again where I think you're not really looking at what's really there. There is a conflict between synthetics and organics in ME3 but there is no conflict that clearly shows synthetics being a genocidal threat, like the catalyst says they are, except for the reapers themselves but they are organic synthetic hybrids and it becomes circular logic to use them as the example that synthetics will always destroy all organics.

This.

Also:

Having 99% of your race wiped out by machines is significant. We shouldn't ignore it just because the geth were merciful enough not to kill them all that day. The geth are not saints. I don't care how much they were covered in sparkles and sunshine in ME3.

What we witness in-game in Mass Effect 3 is a series of recordings dating back before and during the Morning War.

Sorry, but these recordings clearly show that the Quarians already killed off a lot of their own when the first Geth to arm itself did so picking up a rifle, thus pretending that the Geth killed 99% of the Quarians at the time is extremely far-fetched.

Unless of course those shown were all the Quarians that tried to protect the Geth, but in that case declaring martial law to stop a grand total of 2/3 disobedients is nonsense.

I'd also like to point out that the Quarians getting obliterated in ME3 as a result of giving Dreadnought weaponry to the Civilian Fleet is more a case of Darwin-Award-level stupidity on the part of the Quarians than a proof of genocidal tendencies on the part of the Geth.

[Valmar]

No Valmar, this is again where I think you're not really looking at what's really there. There is a conflict between synthetics and organics in ME3 but there is no conflict that clearly shows synthetics being a genocidal threat, like the catalyst says they are, except for the reapers themselves but they are organic synthetic hybrids and it becomes circular logic to use them as the example that synthetics will always destroy all organics.

 

Strawman. You're twisting my argument into something it never was. Which is funny considering you liked my last post where I clarified it.

 

You're arguing for the sake of arguing at this point. I've already clarified my stance several times now. You can keep distorting it if you want but I'm not going to keep humoring a response if you're not even going to listen.

 

 

Sorry, but these recordings clearly show that the Quarians already killed off a lot of their own when the first Geth to arm itself did so picking up a rifle, thus pretending that the Geth killed 99% of the Quarians at the time is extremely far-fetched.
 

 

We see like one or two instances where a quarian got attached to a geth and didn't want to shut them down. That doesn't change the fact that the geth killed 99% of them. It is not extremely far-fetched and it isn't pretending. That is the lore.

 

I will borrow something Vazgen said in a previous topic because he said it well:

 

 

 We are shown one case of a quarian dying for protecting the geth which can be viewed as collateral damage - the quarian dies from an explosion (after being warned multiple times). And we are shown one case of a quarian being detained for protecting a geth. I find it very hard to believe that a conflict of this nature would've resulted in so many civilian deaths, especially since pro-destroy quarians are shown to be determined to minimize losses. 

The quote I brought is from Mass Effect: Revelation. Here is the original text:

"The quarians had neither the numbers nor the ability to stand against their former servants. In a short but savage war their entire society was wiped out. Only a few million survivors—less than one percent of their entire population—escaped the genocide, fleeing their home world in a massive fleet, refugees forced to live in exile."

 

 

 

 

Unless of course those shown were all the Quarians that tried to protect the Geth, but in that case declaring martial law to stop a grand total of 2/3 disobedients is nonsense.
 

 

Call me crazy here but I don't think it was fellow quarians they were trying to stop. It was the massive number of geth that took up arms against them. You know, the ones that wiped out over 99% of their population in a short time.

 

 

I'd also like to point out that the Quarians getting obliterated in ME3 as a result of giving Dreadnought weaponry to the Civilian Fleet is more a case of Darwin-Award-level stupidity on the part of the Quarians than a proof of genocidal tendencies on the part of the Geth.

 

The reaper-upgraded geth did have a little something to do with their extinction. You're also twisting my argument here. I never said the geth were genocidal. I said they were an example of synthetics in conflict with organics. Which coincidentally committed genocide by wiping out 99% of the quarian population. They don't even disagree with the heretics that decided to worship the reapers on go on a rampage killing organics for them. "Neither result is an error." 

 

[Linkenski]

There's a part right at the end of that, just before Kai Leng appears, where the VI says, "Very well. If you have followed the plans for the Crucible, I will interface with your systems and assist the Catalyst to-".

That confuses me. What is this VI going to be assisting the Catalyst to actually do? Surely the Catalyst doesn't need any assistance, as it's a billion year old AI. I'd really like to know what the ending of that sentence was going to be.

This comes back down to the fact that Bioware never managed to completely remove all traces of the earlier iterations of ME3's plot.

Originally Cerberus wasn't trying to control the reapers, they just alligned themselves with them blatantly. Originally Javik was part of the campaign and he was the catalyst, and the catalyst star child had the placeholder name "guardian". A later iteration turned Javik into the prothean VI probably when Bioware realized they had to cut Javik and make him a DLC, and then in the end they realized that the catalyst should be the citadel itself as well as the "guardian".

Like the constant back and forth of Shepard and co believing or doubting the true function of the crucible, (on Thessia they keep yelling "we get the catalyst and the war is over!!! Ooh rah") and the nature of the catalyst being an ever changing plot like the reapers from mass effect 1, to mass effect 2, to mass effect 3.

It's simply inconsistent.

[DanishGambit]

99%? [Citation Needed] 

 

Anyway I never payed much attention to that conflict as I didn't think it was anywhere near as serious as the Krogan one. A competent Reaper force would've wiped out the war-fatigued Quarians immediately after they defeated the Geth. Peace (unlikely imo) or retreat were their only realistic means of survival. It doesn't make sense for the Reapers to go after random factories in the middle of nowhere like Bekenstien and avoid the people with the big guns. But since the Reapers thought that the second largest fleet in the galaxy wasn't a threat it didn't really matter. It reminds me of how the bad guys in Power Rangers used to let the good guys power up and get all their cool toys.

[Sarcastic Tasha]

The Reapers were so much cooler when they were mysterious and unfathomable. Makes me think of the Borg in Star Trek. We never find out how the Borg came to be or what their motivations are (we know they assimilate new and useful species and technologies but they never really explain why) and I think that's good, its scarier to be left in the dark. I still think they messed up with the Borg though by over exposing them. As much as a love Voyager the Borg became much less menacing once Janeway gave them a good kicking, brought one back to her ship and made her wear a catsuit (I actually think Seven of Nine is a fab character but it still makes the Borg less scary).

 

The problem with any crazy powerful baddie is in the end the hero is supposed to defeat them. In Mass Effect the Reapers were built up to be this enemy that basically couldn't be defeated and I think the writers had wrote themselves into a corner there. Other than a Reapers win ending I think anything was going to seem pretty far fetched.

 

I agree that the organic/synthetic clash was one of the themes of the 3 games. But there was also plenty about the clashes between different organic species. Human/Batarian, Krogan/Salarian, etc. I don't see why the Reapers would be concerned specifically with organic/synthetic fighting when organics are violent enough to destroy the galaxy fighting amongst themselves.

 

I don't think having the catalyst in the game from the start would have helped, the problem was him being in the game at all. The ending of the game didn't need to have a twist or anything.