162 réponses à ce sujet

[Railstay]

Talogrungi wrote...

Railstay wrote...

sergio71785 wrote...

I think it makes sense in the scope of the story.

I think the problem most people have with it, is that they imagine at full growth it'd be like some huge human shaped ship or something. In reality, it would look just like a normal reaper, but with the human looking part at its core.

In reality, as opposed to fiction, which doesn't involve spaceships and aliens that all look suspiciously like animals from Earth.

The theory that the cuttlefish design of the Reapers are simply shells is a weak one.  The Human-Reaper is described as an embryo (embryos grow, they aren't added as part of a bigger structure), and it would be pointlessly inefficient to make a an inferior "core" form to host yourself piloting a superior ship.  Why not simply be the ship?

It's not a theory. The human reaper, and it's incorporation into the cuttlefish design of a traditionally recognisable Reaper ship is illustrated in the collectors edition art book that came with the Cerberus Network.

And there are a dozen different versions of Thane and every other character, most of them completely different from the final products.  People seem to forget that "concept art" means "rough draft", not final product.  Entire galleries of content art can be scrapped because of changes during production, whether it's storyline or design direction. 

[D4rk50ul808]

It was terrible on a few different levels.



1. Does it REALLY need to be that big? If I was trying to build a human Reaper why wouldn't I make it human sized in case I wanted to use it for infiltration and such. Also they made enough Reapers with the Protheans to darken the sky, yet it takes millions to make one human one?



2. Did it really have to look dead on a T-1000? I would have liked to see more Reaperish characteristics. It seemed like a G.O.W boss more than a ME boss, at least it didn't have button pressing sequences.



3. Did it really have to be shot in the center of its chest (power supply) or eyes? There could have been much better ways to take this thing down creatively.

[Zhijn]

Beyond silly. Dont care how its explained, i found the hole thing, well.. Silly!. =d

[HK01]

I think I solved the mystery of this design choice: Making the Reaper look that silly was the last act of revenge of the Protheans, a subconscious decision to get even with the Reapers.

[Sailears]

Although I wouldn't call it gamebreaking, I do agree it was a bit silly.

[Rayhaana]

I think the part of the reaper that "looks" like the species it is formed from is just the brain area that is inside the reapers primary body. That sort of explains why the other reapears (from what we've seen) look similar with tentacles on the outside.

[jklinders]

Gill Kaiser wrote...

Weskerr wrote...

Gill Kaiser wrote...

Affective =/= Effective.

Right - that's exactly why I used affective and not "effective." Or do you just like non sequiturs.

...that word, I do not think it means what you think it means.

I agree, here

af·fec·tive  (-fktv)adj. Psychology
1. Influenced by or resulting from the
emotions.2. Concerned with or
arousing feelings or emotions; emotional

I don't think the terminator is either silly or arousing affection. Need a third option

[Count Viceroy]

jklinders wrote...

Gill Kaiser wrote...

Weskerr wrote...

Gill Kaiser wrote...

Affective =/= Effective.

Right - that's exactly why I used affective and not "effective." Or do you just like non sequiturs.

...that word, I do not think it means what you think it means.

I agree, here

af·fec·tive  (-fktv)adj. Psychology
1. Influenced by or resulting from the
emotions.2. Concerned with or
arousing feelings or emotions; emotional

I don't think the terminator is either silly or arousing affection. Need a third option

He already admitted to that, and corrected.

[Talogrungi]

Railstay wrote...

And there are a dozen different versions of Thane and every other character, most of them completely different from the final products.  People seem to forget that "concept art" means "rough draft", not final product.  Entire galleries of content art can be scrapped because of changes during production, whether it's storyline or design direction.

Final drafts are in there too. There's only one picture of the human reaper incorporated into a reaper ship. I'm sorry, but there's no logic in the argument that the concept art is invalid evidence. It's the only evidence, and it fits all the available evidence.

[spernus]

Rayhaana wrote...

I think the part of the reaper that "looks" like the species it is formed from is just the brain area that is inside the reapers primary body. That sort of explains why the other reapears (from what we've seen) look similar with tentacles on the outside.

Quite possible,but we have no idea really. The cycle of destruction and extinction might be going on for million of years and thus a lot of fish or squid like species were crushed.

Either way,the T-800 Reaper had no business being there.No matter the justification,it shouldn't  remind me of the terminator so easily.

[Talogrungi]

D4rk50ul808 wrote...

It was terrible on a few different levels.

1. Does it REALLY need to be that big? If I was trying to build a human Reaper why wouldn't I make it human sized in case I wanted to use it for infiltration and such. Also they made enough Reapers with the Protheans to darken the sky, yet it takes millions to make one human one?

Nope. Each Reaper is slightly different than the rest and the current prevaliing theory is that once every 50,000 years (or whatever the Reaper cycle is) they pick one worthy race and elevate it by creating a new Reaper in its imagine. It's also hypothesised that the Protheans were the only space-faring race during the last cycle and the Reapers (for whatever reason) found them unworthy/unsuitable for ascension.

[Talogrungi]

spernus wrote...

Rayhaana wrote...

I think the part of the reaper that "looks" like the species it is formed from is just the brain area that is inside the reapers primary body. That sort of explains why the other reapears (from what we've seen) look similar with tentacles on the outside.

Quite possible,but we have no idea really. The cycle of destruction and extinction might be going on for million of years and thus a lot of fish or squid like species were crushed.

Either way,the T-800 Reaper had no business being there.No matter the justification,it shouldn't  remind me of the terminator so easily.

That's exactly how the CE art book shows it.

[KainrycKarr]

Rationalize it, explain it, however you want, the image of a giant flippin' human skeleton pullin' a superman in space just looks stupid to me.



I will accept the mentioned concept art as the purpose. That's...a little more acceptable to me.



Cuttlefish looks a lot more...spaceshipey(lol new word) than human skeleton.



Regardless of actual explanation, it cosmetically looks dumb to me.



Here's hoping the "concept art" is what was actually intended with the human reaper larvae. which makes a bit of sense. that human reaper was no where near as big as the derelict reaper or sovereign.

[jklinders]

spernus wrote...

Rayhaana wrote...

I think the part of the reaper that "looks" like the species it is formed from is just the brain area that is inside the reapers primary body. That sort of explains why the other reapears (from what we've seen) look similar with tentacles on the outside.

Quite possible,but we have no idea really. The cycle of destruction and extinction might be going on for million of years and thus a lot of fish or squid like species were crushed.

Either way,the T-800 Reaper had no business being there.No matter the justification,it shouldn't  remind me of the terminator so easily.

Methinks it may have been a last minute design change. I got the artbook that came with the colloectors edition. There was a concept art of a mechanized thing that looked more like a human fetus. Could be mistaken, but I doubt that idea got past the ratings board. you can only push artistic license so far when you consider that the European Union would probably ban the game on that basis.

Lazy art design follows due to time crunch. Just a theory, putting it out there.

[Aradace]

Sorry, I just really and honestly see nothing wrong with how the Human reaper looked...I think you people are over reacting to this whole thing just a teeeeeeeeeeeeeeeny bit lol. It's almost as entertaining as watching the "obsessed" Tali fans. There are normal Tali-fans (like myself who like the character etc.) and the "obsessed". This whole thing with the Human reaper is just as entertaining lol.

[Talogrungi]

KainrycKarr wrote...

Rationalize it, explain it, however you want, the image of a giant flippin' human skeleton pullin' a superman in space just looks stupid to me.

I will accept the mentioned concept art as the purpose. That's...a little more acceptable to me.

Cuttlefish looks a lot more...spaceshipey(lol new word) than human skeleton.

Regardless of actual explanation, it cosmetically looks dumb to me.

Here's hoping the "concept art" is what was actually intended with the human reaper larvae. which makes a bit of sense. that human reaper was no where near as big as the derelict reaper or sovereign.

Yeah, I think everyone is getting hung up on that imagery.

Really, Bioware should have showed something like the concept art at the end; that datapad showing the Reaper, for example .. it could have showed the plans for the human reaper and how it would have been incorporated into the shell. Would have saved a lot of forum-rage.

[Richkat]

I liked Alien 4 the movie right up until it did the same thing as mass effect 2 did. Personally I think there’s no problem with using humans to make reapers as long as they don’t look like giant human robots.

[KainrycKarr]

Aradace wrote...

Sorry, I just really and honestly see nothing wrong with how the Human reaper looked...I think you people are over reacting to this whole thing just a teeeeeeeeeeeeeeeny bit lol. It's almost as entertaining as watching the "obsessed" Tali fans. There are normal Tali-fans (like myself who like the character etc.) and the "obsessed". This whole thing with the Human reaper is just as entertaining lol.

How can you not see anything wrong with a-ASSUMING DIRECT CONTROL.

All is acceptable. Nothing to see here. Move along.

[KainrycKarr]

Richkat wrote...

I liked Alien 4 the movie right up until it did the same thing as mass effect 2 did. Personally I think there’s no problem with using humans to make reapers as long as they don’t look like giant human robots.

There is no Alien 4.

The Alien Franchise stopped at Aliens. Alien 3 and Alien 4 are bastardized fanfiction.

The Steve Perry trilogy is impossibly better in every way.

[Railstay]

Talogrungi wrote...

Railstay wrote...

And there are a dozen different versions of Thane and every other character, most of them completely different from the final products.  People seem to forget that "concept art" means "rough draft", not final product.  Entire galleries of content art can be scrapped because of changes during production, whether it's storyline or design direction.

Final drafts are in there too. There's only one picture of the human reaper incorporated into a reaper ship. I'm sorry, but there's no logic in the argument that the concept art is invalid evidence. It's the only evidence, and it fits all the available evidence.

Not really.  Just because they decided to release a single sketch of the Human-Reaper in the art book doesn't mean it's the end-all of evidence.  Bioware has made it clear that they choose their wording carefully, and I think it's safer to go by inference in the game rather than pointing to concept art as more credible to the final design.

For example, the Codex makes it very clear that Legion chose the word "heretics" to refer to Sovereign's geth with specific intent.  Legion doesn't use "dissenter" or "rebel", but "heretic".  It suggests that what they believe in is a complete and radical departure in mainline geth thinking, so much so that they have broken off to become a totally independent society in a species that is completely interdependent by nature.

So why would the word "embryo" be used to describe the Human-Reaper?  By definition an embryo is a pre-infantile state of a creature that grows to full size.  Embryos aren't created then added onto another form to be complete.  Embryos are already complete -- they just haven't grown to full size yet.  So the wording, the size of the Reaper and the need for millions of more humans to complete it makes sense.  Also, EDI telling us that Reapers are grown using both organic and inorganic material, then also makes sense.  In order for the Human-Reaper to grow to full size, it would need more human material.

Modifié par Railstay, 19 février 2010 - 09:06 .

[Richkat]

If you do the pro Cerberus ending, I could just see in Mass Effect 3 a Japanese style rip-off, giant robot battle ending. The thought of that makes me feel a little sick.

Modifié par Richkat, 19 février 2010 - 09:19 .

[Talogrungi]

Railstay wrote...

Not really.  Just because they decided to release a single sketch of the Human-Reaper in the art book doesn't mean it's the end-all of evidence.  Bioware has made it clear that they choose their wording carefully, and I think it's safer to go by inference in the game rather than pointing to concept art as more credible to the final design.

For example, the Codex makes it very clear that Legion chose the word "heretics" to refer to Sovereign's geth with specific intent.  Legion doesn't use "dissenter" or "rebel", but "heretic".  It suggests that what they believe in is a complete and radical departure in mainline geth thinking, so much so that they have broken off to become a totally independent society in a species that is completely interdependent by nature.

So why would the word "embryo" be used to describe the Human-Reaper?  By definition an embryo is a pre-infantile state of a creature that grows to full size.  Embryos aren't created then added onto another form to be complete.  Embryos are already complete -- they just haven't grown to full size yet.  So the wording, the size of the Reaper and the need for millions of more humans to complete it makes sense.  Also, EDI telling us that Reapers are grown using both organic and inorganic material, then also makes sense.  In order for the Human-Reaper to grow to full size, it would need more human material.

In answer to the criticism of a human reaper looking silly, it's 100% reasonable to point to concept art that shows how a human reaper was to be incorporated into a traditonal reaper ship. If there was any evidence in the game that even hints that the human reaper was not supposed to be part of a larger ship, then I'd agree that in-game > concept. There isn't, so the concept art is the most definitive evidence available.

Not sure what you're getting in regards to the word embryo. It's implied that the human Reaper is an embryo around which the Reaper ship "shape" is formed (or grown, if you prefer) from the organic metal harvested from the humans. The shape of an embryo isn't indicative of the shape of the fully grown creature.

[Ehlisuun]

I don't participate in polls that have terrible spelling in the question.

[Weskerr]

Railstay wrote...

[

So why would the word "embryo" be used to describe the Human-Reaper?  By definition an embryo is a pre-infantile state of a creature that grows to full size.  Embryos aren't created then added onto another form to be complete.  Embryos are already complete -- they just haven't grown to full size yet.  So the wording, the size of the Reaper and the need for millions of more humans to complete it makes sense.  Also, EDI telling us that Reapers are grown using both organic and inorganic material, then also makes sense.  In order for the Human-Reaper to grow to full size, it would need more human material.

I think you're correct on all points except the embryo analogy. You're taking the comparison between the human Reaper and a human embryo too far. I think EDI makes this comparison so as to make it more understandable to Shepard (and the player) that the human Reaper is in a very early stage of development. That's the major similarity between the two. The major difference is that while human embryos are purely organic, Reapers are not. They are a fusion of organic and mechanical material. It's plausible that the completion of the human Reaper is dependent upon both organic growth and additions of machinal parts.

My point is that you can only take the embryo analogy so far before the similarities end.

[meznaric]

Weskerr wrote...

I've seen many threads that lambaste the human Reaper as rediculous silliness. Well, what I want to know is what most of the players think about it in terms of the overarching story of the Mass Effect series and the plot progression of Mass Effect 2. Are there any players who think the human Reaper is an effective advancement to the Mass Effect story and plot? Here's a link to the poll:

http://social.biowar...111/polls/2421/

The Human Reaper for me just takes the Reaper's "charm" away. I mean what the hell are they gonna do with a human looking reaper? Walk through space at 4km/h? Definitely silly.