165 réponses à ce sujet

[themikefest]

Admiral Hackett mentions that they are working on focusing the Crucible energy to only target the Reapers.

So?
 

The Starchild states that the Crucible energy will not only destroy the Reapers, but synthetics, mass relays, and all your advanced technology, etc.

Really?

 

This is what it says  https://youtu.be/cUjPGt-OxUU?t=27m53s

 

It's a matter of trust. So by saying you want an alternative due to what the Starchild states, it seems to me you trust what he was saying over Admiral Hackett.

So me posting something that doesn't include the catalyst means I trust it? That would be hard to do if it never existed, right?
 

[GalacticWolf5]

The Starchild states that the Crucible energy will not only destroy the Reapers, but synthetics, mass relays, and all your advanced technology, etc.

That's because the Crucible is damaged. The Catalyst says it right before this.

[AlanC9]

Admiral Hackett mentions that they are working on focusing the Crucible energy to only target the Reapers.
 
The Starchild states that the Crucible energy will not only destroy the Reapers, but synthetics, mass relays, and all your advanced technology, etc.
 
It's a matter of trust. So by saying you want an alternative due to what the Starchild states, it seems to me you trust what he was saying over Admiral Hackett.

Did Hackett say that they had succeeded?

[Vazgen]

It's only damaged if you have low EMS.

It's always damaged. In High EMS endings Catalyst says that the "device you refer to as Crucible appears largely intact"

[themikefest]

You believed what the Catalyst/Reapers told you (by posting the link to clarify). Therefore you trust the Reapers.

I posted the link to let you know what you posted was incorrect

[TwevOWNED]

Hard to avoid the starchild isn't really the right criterion here, you know. It's not like the starchild was the only option Bio thought they had. It accomplished certain goals they had, but nobody sensible ever thought the kid was the only way to present that material. What you're doing is setting yourself different goals than Bio set for themselves in the first place, since you want to leave the Reapers mysterious and Bio apparently never even considered that approach, judging from Drew K.'s statements.


Why wouldn't the Reapers just FTL out when they notice their shields aren't working? Even if you can take a bunch of them out before they do, you've still got an enemy force that's faster than your fleet and the Crucible. They can just fly around an blow up your worlds before you can intervene. Organics need supplies and fuel, Reapers don't, so eventually the organic fleets collapse. You'd have to rewrite those aspects of the game too, though I don't think that's a huge problem -- most of that's only conveyed in Codex entries anyway.


This isn't really plausible. Why would Harbinger do that? Why build it on the planet rather than in space? If it needs to be on the planet, why not run it via telepresence the way he ran the Collectors? Also, Harbinger's death is a rerun of Sovereign's, but I presume that's deliberate.

 

Not considering the approach to leave Repeal's origins alone is part of the problem as well. By forcing a "Repears are secretly working for a greater good" plotline the series has lost part of it's integrity, as a lead figure put his/her own wants ahead of the good of the story. A conventional victory with heavy losses is what the story was leading to, and what it needed to be the best it could have been, by forcing the "controversial bittersweet" ending the series as a whole is permanently effected, as no matter what anyone does in any game that occurs before the reaper war, it ends in red, blue, or green. It is, as someone said, like George Lucas and the prequels, in the sense that a lead figure could not step aside and think of the story before his own agenda.  

 

As for the reapers fleeing, the crucible could just prevent ftl travel. Or maybe the reapers just think they can win anyway. The crucible can be as powerful as one wants, but it needs to be tuned to not be too powerful to make it seem like a cop out. There is a delicate balance that needs to be obeyed when dealing with such a plot device.

 

On a side note, I forgot it was Dark Energy, not dark matter. Just a different name for plot substance though

[fhs33721]

 A conventional victory with heavy losses is what the story was leading to

When was this supposed to be? Because as far as I remember this was never where the story was leading to.

In ME1 you desperately try to stop Sovereign because conventional victory against the full Reaper force is impossible, evidenced by the fact that Sovereign almost wrecks an entire fleet alone.

In ME2  the Reapers throwaway-husks from previous cycles are an legitimate threat for human colonies and everybody is so afraid of them that nobody will even acknowdlege their existance. The Arrival DLC once more is about stalling the Reapers because their arrival would mean the end of galactic civilization for sure.

And then surprise in ME3. The Reapers indeed utterly wreck everyone and only a superweapon found during the time "Arrival" bought the galaxy can save us.

 

If you think that conventional victory was an option at any point of the story you are completly delusional and actively ignore what all three games tried to hammer into your head.

Namely: Reapers>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>everyone else.

[dorktainian]

When was this supposed to be? Because as far as I remember this was never where the story was leading to.

 

It seemed to me to be leading us towards a Reaper Invasion and into conflict.  At no point did it give me the feeling that we would lose, because no matter how bad the situation might be there is always  the chance of winning.

 

I can think of many reasons why the reapers would not win.

[JasonShepard]

It seemed to me to be leading us towards a Reaper Invasion and into conflict.  At no point did it give me the feeling that we would lose, because no matter how bad the situation might be there is always  the chance of winning.

 

I can think of many reasons why the reapers would not win.

 

I can't. Not if you're talking conventional victory.

 

The Reapers built the Mass Relays. The Mass Relays, as evidenced by Arrival, are capable of being blown up to wipe out star systems. That means the Reapers are capable of constructing Supernova Bombs.

 

If the Reapers registered us as a threat - a real, bonafide threat, which was more important to wipe out than harvest - they'd wipe us out. And we wouldn't have a say in the matter. The only reason we're alive in ME3 is because they want us alive. If they wanted us dead, we would be. TIM correctly points this out during the conversation on Thessia.

 

Conventional victory was never on the table. Imagine that the Reapers decided we were too dangerous to be left alive:

 

Our fleet jumps into a star system? Supernova bomb.

They find one of our colonies? Lure us with the prospect of evacuation, then Supernova bomb.

We retreat away from the Relays, and do our best to disappear? Distribute a network of Occuli across the galaxy. One of them detects us? Supernova bomb.

 

We never settle on a planet, keep on the move, and never hang around long enough to gather resources because of the risk of supernova bombs? They just have to wait for us to starve.

 

You get the idea.

The Reapers could sterilise the galaxy, give up on harvesting our cycle, and wait for the next one. The Catalyst downgrades the length of time between cycles so that the next species aren't so dangerous, then resets the trap and sends the Reapers back into Dark Space. Heck, something like this probably actually happened at some point in the past.

 

Frankly, compared to Sovereign in ME1, the Reapers seem to have been nerfed somewhat for ME3, and we still didn't stand a chance without the Crucible. We needed something that dealt with the Reaper problem - and dealt with it quickly - so that they never even had the chance to consider us a threat.

So while I agree that the Crucible plot was handled badly, I don't dispute that something like it was necessary for ME3. (I've said it before, but I'd have gone with the idea that the Reapers themselves were indoctrinated, and have us develop something that releases them to fight amongst themselves.)

[KaiserShep]

Part of me always wondered if the Crucible was just going to fire something through the Citadel relay and destroy something left behind in dark space, then the reapers keel over and die, because controlling entity on the other side or something.

[JasonShepard]

In a sense, the Crucible is still a conventional victory. It's just conventional on a huge scale.... countless cycles of species contributed to it. But at the end of the day, it's just a mundane tool. Which is conventional.

 

And the Catalyst acknowledges that "organics are more resourceful than we realized". Which signals a conventional type of victory... that we evolved to a point that it changed all of it's parameters. It's given up.

 

I like that. Yeah, at the end of the day, the Crucible is a military asset - an incredibly powerful, game-changing asset, but a military asset nonetheless. Sort of like having a bigger cannon (much, much bigger) than the enemy.

[Killdren88]

I had a similar idea several months ago. Granted I had a different idea in mind.

 

My idea was using the device that detects the Reaper IFF on the Omega 4 relay and applying it to the Crucible.  In Theory, the crucible would then only target the Reapers that use the Reaper Signal which the Reapers/Collectors use in order to safely travel into the Galactic Core. The way I piece it together is that the moment it links to the Citadel, the time that Shepard takes to talk with the Catalyst, the Crucible hones in on IFF of each Reaper in the Galaxy. This being aided by the War asset of the interferometric arrays. So most of the Leg work for targeting all the Reapers is already done. With this in mid it is only a matter of Shepard pulling the trigger.

 

Then you might think that "The Geth and EDI both use Reaper tech. How does this save them?" While EDI will be a bit more of a challenge seeing how she has a IFF installed, the Geth on the other hand, simply use reaper tech. They do not use the Reaper signal of the IFF which the Omega-4 device looks for. So with the Target parameters in mind the Crucible shouldn't have the Geth on the list of Targets in the Galaxy. EDI on the other hand, has the IFF hardwired into her. So either, they work to have her IFF removed, or EDI somehow Isolates the IFF  from the rest of her systems so that it is only destroyed instead of all of her.

[dorktainian]

I can't. Not if you're talking conventional victory.

 

The Reapers built the Mass Relays. The Mass Relays, as evidenced by Arrival, are capable of being blown up to wipe out star systems. That means the Reapers are capable of constructing Supernova Bombs.

 

If the Reapers registered us as a threat - a real, bonafide threat, which was more important to wipe out than harvest - they'd wipe us out. And we wouldn't have a say in the matter. The only reason we're alive in ME3 is because they want us alive. If they wanted us dead, we would be. TIM correctly points this out during the conversation on Thessia.

 

Conventional victory was never on the table. Imagine that the Reapers decided we were too dangerous to be left alive:

 

Our fleet jumps into a star system? Supernova bomb.

They find one of our colonies? Lure us with the prospect of evacuation, then Supernova bomb.

We retreat away from the Relays, and do our best to disappear? Distribute a network of Occuli across the galaxy. One of them detects us? Supernova bomb.

 

We never settle on a planet, keep on the move, and never hang around long enough to gather resources because of the risk of supernova bombs? They just have to wait for us to starve.

 

You get the idea.

The Reapers could sterilise the galaxy, give up on harvesting our cycle, and wait for the next one. The Catalyst downgrades the length of time between cycles so that the next species aren't so dangerous, then resets the trap and sends the Reapers back into Dark Space. Heck, something like this probably actually happened at some point in the past.

 

Frankly, compared to Sovereign in ME1, the Reapers seem to have been nerfed somewhat for ME3, and we still didn't stand a chance without the Crucible. We needed something that dealt with the Reaper problem - and dealt with it quickly - so that they never even had the chance to consider us a threat.

So while I agree that the Crucible plot was handled badly, I don't dispute that something like it was necessary for ME3. (I've said it before, but I'd have gone with the idea that the Reapers themselves were indoctrinated, and have us develop something that releases them to fight amongst themselves.)

 

Cains and Fleets.  That's how you defeat Reapers.

 

The moment you think the reapers are unbeatable you have lost.  Also can i point out the ME3 multiplayer campaign?  You can participate and push the reapers back.  Now if you can do that just by playing tonnes of multiplayer then it is possible to beat the reapers.

 

Also... Just destroy the Citadel.  Destroy Starjar.  Theoretically this would render all reapers inert.  Remember he is the reapers.....

 

And before you say "what about earth?", what about it?  Blow the citadel = I win button.

[Killdren88]

Cains and Fleets.  That's how you defeat Reapers.

 

The moment you think the reapers are unbeatable you have lost.  Also can i point out the ME3 multiplayer campaign?  You can participate and push the reapers back.  Now if you can do that just by playing tonnes of multiplayer then it is possible to beat the reapers.

 

Also... Just destroy the Citadel.  Destroy Starjar.  Theoretically this would render all reapers inert.  Remember he is the reapers.....

 

And before you say "what about earth?", what about it?  Blow the citadel = I win button.

 

Not gonna lie. I thought during ME3's life that was Bioware's plan to make Multiplayer popular. Do enough weekly missions and we release conventional victory ending DLC.

[Killdren88]

I don't know what it's relation to the Reapers is exactly. The Catalyst says he controls them, that they're his solution... but they also seem to have some form of autonomy too. Like the Reaper on Rannoch: "Shepard...... Harbinger speaks of you." As if it's some seperate AI, having conversations with Harbinger.

 

Then Harbinger confuses matters. "We are Harbinger." "I am Harbinger."

 

Well before they made the Turn with Star-jar. Harbinger was the assumed leader. It made sense at the time.

[fhs33721]

Cains and Fleets.  That's how you defeat Reapers.

 

The moment you think the reapers are unbeatable you have lost.  Also can i point out the ME3 multiplayer campaign?  You can participate and push the reapers back.  Now if you can do that just by playing tonnes of multiplayer then it is possible to beat the reapers.

 

Also... Just destroy the Citadel.  Destroy Starjar.  Theoretically this would render all reapers inert.  Remember he is the reapers.....

 

And before you say "what about earth?", what about it?  Blow the citadel = I win button.

Cains are never shown to harm a Reaper at all just some random anti aircraft cannon that is not a Reaper but just looks similar. The Reapers also have a bigger fleet than everyone else combined. So even if it didn't take fire from 4 dreadnaught-class ships to down the shield of one Reaper they'd still have the upper hand. So no, Cains and fleets are not how you beat the Reapers.

 

Multiplayer is worthless for story and lore purposes if you ask me, but let's assume that it is actually relevant. Then you are still just pushing back the Reapers groundforces, which they have an almost limitless supply of. Sure you are pushing them back momentarily but they can just throw more husks at you later and if that doesn't work they might still decide to just glass the entire area from orbit, like they did with Beckenstein, and harvest somewhere else.

 

Nothing idicates that destroying the citadel would render the Reapers inert, since they do seem to act on some level of induvidual independence. 

Plus isn't the citadel lorewise described as pretty much indestrucable to the point where it takes several days of sustained bombardmet to inflict serious damage? Enough time for the Reapers to get there and kick your ass before you can actually destroy it, I wager.

Also if you magically kill all the Reapers via destroying the citadel that isn't conventional victory either thats just the same space-magical win button as Destroy-crubcile only presented slightly different.

 

Conventional victory was never presented as valid option in the trilogy. Never. Deal with it.

[grey_wind]

A conventional victory makes the most sense from a thematic point of view. But conventional doesn't have to equal just more dakka like most people think.

 

You can still have a super-weapon be the key to winning in a conventional victory scenario. For example, if the Crucible was something built and designed by this cycle alone, most people wouldn't have a problem with it. Hell, it's not even a far fetched concept. At its most basic level, the Crucible is a weapon that combines with the Citadel to release the energy of the mass relays, exclusively targeted at the Reapers. It's not implausible that after all the knowledge the Protheans gathered about how the Citadel works archived in Ilos combined with all the knowledge about Reapers EDI datamines from the Collector Base, this cycle could build such a weapon as described above.

Throw in TIM's research on Horizon paying off, and you can write in the Control ending reasonably well.

 

Of course, such a scenario makes including Synthesis in the final narrative completely impossible, but that's not too great a loss.

 

The reason people hate the stupid Crucible as presented in-game is because it feels unearned. It's a long-forgotten "I Win Button" that's just conveniently dropped into your lap when you have no other solution and the threat is most dire. It feels like divine (plot) intervention, and completely undermines the thematic resonance behind breaking the destined cycle the Reapers impose upon every civilization.

[Iakus]

A conventional victory makes the most sense from a thematic point of view. But conventional doesn't have to equal just more dakka like most people think.

 

You can still have a super-weapon be the key to winning in a conventional victory scenario. For example, if the Crucible was something built and designed by this cycle alone, most people wouldn't have a problem with it. Hell, it's not even a far fetched concept. At its most basic level, the Crucible is a weapon that combines with the Citadel to release the energy of the mass relays, exclusively targeted at the Reapers. It's not implausible that after all the knowledge the Protheans gathered about how the Citadel works archived in Ilos combined with all the knowledge about Reapers EDI datamines from the Collector Base, this cycle could build such a weapon as described above.

Throw in TIM's research on Horizon paying off, and you can write in the Control ending reasonably well.

 

Of course, such a scenario makes including Synthesis in the final narrative completely impossible, but that's not too great a loss.

 

The reason people hate the stupid Crucible as presented in-game is because it feels unearned. It's a long-forgotten "I Win Button" that's just conveniently dropped into your lap when you have no other solution and the threat is most dire. It feels like divine (plot) intervention, and completely undermines the thematic resonance behind breaking the destined cycle the Reapers impose upon every civilization.

So.  Much.  This.