ME3 End: Do you agree with the Reapers?

 Pages PREV 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 NEXT
 

Casual Shinji:

ChrisRedfield92:

Casual Shinji:
What the game actually presented us as the Reapers' motivation was so lackluster and flat, that I don't even deem it worthy of discussing whether or not I agreed with it. It was fucking stupid, and it never should've been there in the first place.

If the explanation had been as simple as "we are the top of the food chain and we harvest organic civilizations to reproduce" that would have made sense, so why they decided to go in that direction is beyond my ability to comprehend.

You remember that part in Mass Effect 1 where you actually talk to Sovereign?

It was a great moment, because you were suddenly confronted with an enemy that was totally beyond you in every possible way. Even just talking to it through a hologram filled you with a sense of awe and fear. Suddenly giving them some sort of retarded moral of maintaining the balance of organic life was a fucking detriment to the Reapers as unstoppable godlike doombringers from beyond the blackness of space.

It's like giving Killer Bob from Twin Peaks motivation. He fucks with people's minds and kills them simply because he has the power to do so, not because of deeper moral issue.

So we agree.

ChrisRedfield92:

Kopikatsu:

ChrisRedfield92:

If the explanation had been as simple as "we are the top of the food chain and we harvest organic civilizations to reproduce" that would have made sense, so why they decided to go in that direction is beyond my ability to comprehend.

They spent the first two games saying that the Reaper's goals are incomprehensible.

Most people can't comprehend the Reaper's goals. Bioware went meta.

No, I comprehend that the reaper's goals don't make a lick of sense.

They may not make sense to you, but they do to me. If you factor in that the Reapers as a whole are flawed.

Jfswift:
**Spoiler** discussion topic for the antagonist of ME3.

The choice is not theirs to make whether a generation of our species creates sentient machines that will wipe us out.

There is not enough information from the star-child to garner consensus on what option is correct but i would like to believe that it is destroy. Destroy is the only ending that wipes the slate clean for rebuilding purposes. Whatever bloody mess that comes out of it will surely be better than the other options. Because at least then life will have freedom.

Nimcha:
All of your questions are easily answerable and have been answered multiple times, but because the last one is easiest to explain I'll do that one:

The synthesis option isn't always available. It only comes with enough war assets and the Crucible.

Gotcha. The Space Magic that powers synthesis is only available if Shepard finds enough War Assets. You're right, that makes PERFECT sense now. Why couldn't I see it?

Nimcha:

ChrisRedfield92:

Kopikatsu:

They spent the first two games saying that the Reaper's goals are incomprehensible.

Most people can't comprehend the Reaper's goals. Bioware went meta.

No, I comprehend that the reaper's goals don't make a lick of sense.

They may not make sense to you, but they do to me. If you factor in that the Reapers as a whole are flawed.

Synthetics kill organics so some god child invented other synthetics to kill organics before organics invent synthetics that kill organics.
Very sensical and well thought out.

I agree with the Reapers, not that I like it (if I were in a race subjected to reaping) but I understand their logic. It is better to remove the few at the very top to ensure the rest have a chance to be at the top.

And this is not like this is the Reapers first go around, there is so much back history to the Reapers that is still unknown. We do not know if they ever tried to warn previous races that you should not create synthetics or bad things will happen. Races still create uncontrollable synthetics and the Reapers had to go ahead and reap anyways.

I do agree that learning about their motives, was about a dull as learning about Star Wars midichlorians, "Really? It boils down to THAT CRAP?!?!"

And personally, I loved the voice and attitude behind Sovereign. I found Harbinger to be just annoying, like a 14 year old kid on Xbox annoying - spouting the same 4 lines. Sovereign had depth.

But since we have learned about it. Yea, it makes sense; not that I have to like it.

BloatedGuppy:

Nimcha:
All of your questions are easily answerable and have been answered multiple times, but because the last one is easiest to explain I'll do that one:

The synthesis option isn't always available. It only comes with enough war assets and the Crucible.

Gotcha. The Space Magic that powers synthesis is only available if Shepard finds enough War Assets. You're right, that makes PERFECT sense now. Why couldn't I see it?

Well, judging by this reaction you don't want to see it. That's fine, you know. It just means I won't have to bother trying to explain.

They have a laudable goal: prevention of organic's destruction from synthetics.

Crappy execution: Harvest said organics, render them into "paste" and then place them into our machines of destruction and war. Rinse and repeat every 50,000 years.

Better plan of action: Demand that every robot, synthetic or AI have the three laws of robotics encoded within them (aka: Don't kill an organic either through action or inaction).

Personally I was enjoying the mysterious, Cthulesque horror of the Reapers, whose motivations were mysterious. Then the damned starchild showed up and ruined it.

ChrisRedfield92:

Nimcha:

ChrisRedfield92:

No, I comprehend that the reaper's goals don't make a lick of sense.

They may not make sense to you, but they do to me. If you factor in that the Reapers as a whole are flawed.

Synthetics kill organics so some god child invented other synthetics to kill organics before organics invent synthetics that kill organics.
Very sensical and well thought out.

You already know it's not as simple as that. This thread has some good discussion about the Reapers motivation. It's more nuanced than that simple sentence. It just seems like you've already made up your mind.

Nimcha:

BloatedGuppy:

Nimcha:
All of your questions are easily answerable and have been answered multiple times, but because the last one is easiest to explain I'll do that one:

The synthesis option isn't always available. It only comes with enough war assets and the Crucible.

Gotcha. The Space Magic that powers synthesis is only available if Shepard finds enough War Assets. You're right, that makes PERFECT sense now. Why couldn't I see it?

Well, judging by this reaction you don't want to see it. That's fine, you know. It just means I won't have to bother trying to explain.

Ah, "I won't bother trying to explain" the last refuge for someone with no answers and no compelling arguments.

Nimcha:

ChrisRedfield92:

Nimcha:

They may not make sense to you, but they do to me. If you factor in that the Reapers as a whole are flawed.

Synthetics kill organics so some god child invented other synthetics to kill organics before organics invent synthetics that kill organics.
Very sensical and well thought out.

You already know it's not as simple as that. This thread has some good discussion about the Reapers motivation. It's more nuanced than that simple sentence. It just seems like you've already made up your mind.

No, that's exactly what the catalyst said.
Undeniable fact.

Nimcha:
Well, judging by this reaction you don't want to see it. That's fine, you know. It just means I won't have to bother trying to explain.

Well, that's one way of approaching things I suppose. Instead of Burden of Proof, we can just have "Burden of Suspension of Disbelief". Something doesn't make sense? It's your fault, for not being open minded enough.

BloatedGuppy:

Nimcha:
Well, judging by this reaction you don't want to see it. That's fine, you know. It just means I won't have to bother trying to explain.

Well, that's one way of approaching things I suppose. Instead of Burden of Proof, we can just have "Burden of Suspension of Disbelief". Something doesn't make sense? It's your fault, for not being open minded enough.

I could answer the rest of your original questions if you want. Maybe we got off on the wrong foot.

edit

Nimcha:

ChrisRedfield92:

Nimcha:

They may not make sense to you, but they do to me. If you factor in that the Reapers as a whole are flawed.

Synthetics kill organics so some god child invented other synthetics to kill organics before organics invent synthetics that kill organics.
Very sensical and well thought out.

You already know it's not as simple as that. This thread has some good discussion about the Reapers motivation. It's more nuanced than that simple sentence. It just seems like you've already made up your mind.

Why should we believe the starchild? What makes it better than the other AIs? If all AI are bound to betray organics as he says, who says he doesn't betray us? Why are we forced to accept a short explanation at the very end of the game without having any option to question his goals?

Nimcha:
I could answer the rest of your original questions if you want. Maybe we got off on the wrong foot.

You can if you want. I actually appreciate the degree of rationalization that goes into trying to make sense of some of this. I do want it made clear, though, that I think what you and Sajuuk are doing here is a form of fan fiction. And that's not me trying to denigrate it, it's me saying that all of this is speculation and hypotheses, because the game's writers didn't feel it was necessary to include sufficient information/motivation for any of it to make sense without the player/viewer/reader filling in a lot of blanks with their imagination. I ADMIRE your imagination. But I don't think it excuses poor/rushed/sloppy storytelling.

The 'everything will be bad no matter what' argument is a cowards argument. So no I don't agree.

Welp, it's gonna be bad no matter what we do(cuz we said so) so let's murder everything to save them. That. Doesn't. Make. Sense.

lapan:

Nimcha:

ChrisRedfield92:

Synthetics kill organics so some god child invented other synthetics to kill organics before organics invent synthetics that kill organics.
Very sensical and well thought out.

You already know it's not as simple as that. This thread has some good discussion about the Reapers motivation. It's more nuanced than that simple sentence. It just seems like you've already made up your mind.

Why should we believe the starchild? What makes it better than the other AIs? If all AI are bound to betray organics as he says, who says he doesn't betray us? Why are we forced to accept a short explanation at the very end of the game without having any option to question his goals?

Alright, so you don't believe the Catalyst. The Reapers destroy galactic civilization and the cycle continues. Do you think that would be a better ending?

Nimcha:

lapan:

Nimcha:

You already know it's not as simple as that. This thread has some good discussion about the Reapers motivation. It's more nuanced than that simple sentence. It just seems like you've already made up your mind.

Why should we believe the starchild? What makes it better than the other AIs? If all AI are bound to betray organics as he says, who says he doesn't betray us? Why are we forced to accept a short explanation at the very end of the game without having any option to question his goals?

Alright, so you don't believe the Catalyst. The Reapers destroy galactic civilization and the cycle continues. Do you think that would be a better ending?

I think it would be more poignant and make more sense to just let everybody die and let the next cycle take their chances.

BloatedGuppy:

Nimcha:
I could answer the rest of your original questions if you want. Maybe we got off on the wrong foot.

You can if you want. I actually appreciate the degree of rationalization that goes into trying to make sense of some of this. I do want it made clear, though, that I think what you and Sajuuk are doing here is a form of fan fiction. And that's not me trying to denigrate it, it's me saying that all of this is speculation and hypotheses, because the game's writers didn't feel it was necessary to include sufficient information/motivation for any of it to make sense without the player/viewer/reader filling in a lot of blanks with their imagination. I ADMIRE your imagination. But I don't think it excuses poor/rushed/sloppy storytelling.

Well, I'd like to think this is what the writers intended when they said they wanted to ending to create discussion. I try to fill in as many gaps as possible with knowledge from the actual game universe, and for me most of it then makes sense.

I've dealt with open endings before, and I don't think it's necessarily poor, rushed or sloppy. Though in this instance there are still some things not readily explainable (the Normandy sequence mostly).

Other than that, the biggest reason I don't have a big problem with this ending is that it allows people to continue thinking about the universe they themselves more or less shaped with their Shepard. The universe and story set it in that I created by playing my Shepard is most likely vastly different from yours, even though the biggest difference boils down to one big choice between three options.

Nimcha:

lapan:

Nimcha:

You already know it's not as simple as that. This thread has some good discussion about the Reapers motivation. It's more nuanced than that simple sentence. It just seems like you've already made up your mind.

Why should we believe the starchild? What makes it better than the other AIs? If all AI are bound to betray organics as he says, who says he doesn't betray us? Why are we forced to accept a short explanation at the very end of the game without having any option to question his goals?

Alright, so you don't believe the Catalyst. The Reapers destroy galactic civilization and the cycle continues. Do you think that would be a better ending?

I'm saying that the whole explanation of the starchild is flawed. To many informations are withheld and we are forced to suddenly believe an entirely new character. We don't know what consequences our choices have and for all we know we might just have doomed everything we fought for anyways. It's an incomplete ending, based on a flawed character with a paradoxical motive.

ChrisRedfield92:

Nimcha:

lapan:

Why should we believe the starchild? What makes it better than the other AIs? If all AI are bound to betray organics as he says, who says he doesn't betray us? Why are we forced to accept a short explanation at the very end of the game without having any option to question his goals?

Alright, so you don't believe the Catalyst. The Reapers destroy galactic civilization and the cycle continues. Do you think that would be a better ending?

I think it would be more poignant and make more sense to just let everybody die and let the next cycle take their chances.

Then there would be even less consquence to your actions. And people already feel that's the case. Looking at the reactions, that ending would've gotten just as bad a reception.

lapan:

Nimcha:

lapan:

Why should we believe the starchild? What makes it better than the other AIs? If all AI are bound to betray organics as he says, who says he doesn't betray us? Why are we forced to accept a short explanation at the very end of the game without having any option to question his goals?

Alright, so you don't believe the Catalyst. The Reapers destroy galactic civilization and the cycle continues. Do you think that would be a better ending?

I'm saying that the whole explanation of the starchild is flawed. To many informations are withheld and we are forced to suddenly believe an entirely new character. We don't know what consequences our choices have and for all we know we might just have doomed everything we fought for anyways.

That's... pretty much the point of all the games in the series. If you already knew what consequences your choices would have, what's the point in providing a choice at all? Take the rachni queen. Saving her could possibly doom the entire galaxy to a new rachni invasion. You don't know. That's what makes a choice relevant.

In fact, I'd go so far as in saying the Catalyst provides you with a lot more information than the aforementioned rachni queen. The Catalyst explains what happens after each choice.

God, I'm getting annoyed again. You do all that build up, for what? Some fucking Neon Genesis bullshit.

Nimcha:
Well, I'd like to think this is what the writers intended when they said they wanted to ending to create discussion. I try to fill in as many gaps as possible with knowledge from the actual game universe, and for me most of it then makes sense.

I hear that, but I don't think this was a particularly positive form of speculation, and the fairly high level of community outrage would seem to support that. There are lots of ways to set up compelling cliff hangers or plot points to power speculation without doing what was done. I especially don't want to have to speculate about why characters are suddenly exhibiting bizarre/inexplicable behavior or why people are coming back from the dead. That's speculation I could do without. And I don't want to have to speculate about whether or not the Space Child was an unreliable narrator. If you're going to have an unreliable narrator or a red herring, you really need a reveal at some point.

Nimcha:
I've dealt with open endings before, and I don't think it's necessarily poor, rushed or sloppy. Though in this instance there are still some things not readily explainable (the Normandy sequence mostly).

No, I know you don't. We're in disagreement about that, but it's okay. People are free to love what they love, and if you love the ending, it's not my place to tell you you're wrong for doing so. I wish I could love the ending. I've loved a lot of controversial endings. This one really burned me, and the more I've debated it, the more I've tried to rationalize it, the more I've combed over what they've given us, the more irritated I've become.

Jfswift:
**Spoiler** discussion topic for the antagonist of ME3.

Do I agree with the villain?

Not one single bit. The logic the Reapers had of organics and synthetics duking it out to the death is silly to the utmost, because not only does it completely ignore the fact that A)synthetics and organics can work together for a common goal (A point so clear that it actually exists in the game) but B) that all organics fight each other. It's called life. We're hardwired to drive towards our goals, and outdo our potential competitors, which may sometimes lead to conflict. It's unfortunate, but it happens. However, if you've ever looked at history, I can say with pretty good surety that we as a species have never wiped ours selves out. This is because our desire to live is one of those instincts that drive us more than any other. The only way to succeed is to ensure that we don't get ourselves killed, and mutually-assured destruction serves no one's survival instinct. Even synthetic life, considering the electronic nature of them, will have some sort of aversion to being dead in one form or another, so even they would want to prevent their destruction. If organics and sythetics go to war, both sides would sue for peace if the they felt that the war would end in their extinction, so the Reapers have committed mass genocide for eons because their leader is a twit who can't figure out something that any sentience being knows intrinsically.

Honestly, fuck that ending.

Nimcha:

ChrisRedfield92:

Nimcha:

Alright, so you don't believe the Catalyst. The Reapers destroy galactic civilization and the cycle continues. Do you think that would be a better ending?

I think it would be more poignant and make more sense to just let everybody die and let the next cycle take their chances.

Then there would be even less consquence to your actions. And people already feel that's the case. Looking at the reactions, that ending would've gotten just as bad a reception.

Yeah, but if I had to choose between everybody dying and this, I would have killed off everybody. At least it wouldn't have created plot holes and left people with a million questions.

I the writers wanted speculation from the audience, then they left way too many things open ended for anyone to get much satisfaction.

And to me having the audience speculate what happens after the end of the third chapter in the trilogy is just a lazy cop out. And in this case it's not even a well told or well thought out lazy cop out.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ey1cCgdgOEw (I can't get the youtube linking to work >.<)

Javik says it really well.

But just because there is a peace between Geth and Quarians right now doesn't mean they won't grow and try to wipe out Organics further down the line. As well as Humanity has also been toying with AI systems, so what if that goes rogue and builds a massive amount of creatures that wipes out anything and everything because humanity decided not to follow Council regulations?

To me, the Reaper's Ideas make completely logical sense, if they had wiped out all synthetics and left all organics left, how long would it take for the organics to rebuild the synthetics all over again? And the entire process was pointless to complete.
Now wiping out the organics what know how to create synthetics removes any knowledge that could recreate synthetics for a large number of years, (Say up to 50,000).

tendaji:
Now wiping out the organics what know how to create synthetics removes any knowledge that could recreate synthetics for a large number of years, (Say up to 50,000).

You're ascribing a bizarre motivation to the Reapers here, though. "How long would it take", and "This way they get a 50,000 year break". Are the Reapers just looking to maximize their vacation time? Who cares how long it takes? Just fly around blowing up new synthetic factories on a daily basis if you need to. It's not like the Reapers would realistically be heading back out into Deep Space before getting a call and thinking "Aw man...more synthetics? This sucks! We gotta find a way to get a longer break".

As for Javik, Javik is not presented to us as an objective observer. How is Javik's view of the universe and his particular brand of fatalism any more compelling or truthful than anyone else's?

tendaji:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ey1cCgdgOEw (I can't get the youtube linking to work >.<)

Javik says it really well.

But just because there is a peace between Geth and Quarians right now doesn't mean they won't grow and try to wipe out Organics further down the line. As well as Humanity has also been toying with AI systems, so what if that goes rogue and builds a massive amount of creatures that wipes out anything and everything because humanity decided not to follow Council regulations?

To me, the Reaper's Ideas make completely logical sense, if they had wiped out all synthetics and left all organics left, how long would it take for the organics to rebuild the synthetics all over again? And the entire process was pointless to complete.
Now wiping out the organics what know how to create synthetics removes any knowledge that could recreate synthetics for a large number of years, (Say up to 50,000).

But they don't know for sure, so basically they are killing trillions and trillions of people on a hunch, doesn't that seem a little silly to you?

The_Blue_Rider:
Not really, what gives the Reapers the right to do what they do?
Especially when its shown Synthetics and Organics can co exist (Geth and Quarians)

nothing gives them the right but hell nothing gives us the right to stop them you could argue, but we would anyway.

geth and quarians is just one example out of an infinte universe, doesnt really hold much sway.

SajuukKhar:

IMGF:
Um, no.

Because the "solution" is the most ridiculous idea ever. While it sort of make sense to get rid of advanced lifeforms to protect lower forms of life from being destroyed by the synthetics that the higher forms of life made, just looking at the Geth/Quarian peace situation completely blows the God Child's theory that synthetics will always destroy organics out of the water.

And you are complexity ignoring the fact tat the ONLY reason peace was able to be made between the two races was because of the impending threat of total annihilation by the Reapers.

Had there been no reapers there would have been no sovereign, no Saren going rouge, no Geth attack on Eden prime, no Shepard doing ANYTHING in ME1, no Legion being built to find Shepard, no Shep finding Legion, no bringing together of the two races.

Had the Reapers not shown up the Geth would have remained as they were, behind the Perseus veil suffering from on again off again attacked by vengeful Quarrian's and other organics hateful of AI which very likely could have led to an AI/Organic war, despite the Geth's want for peace.

Do not try to take actions that only resulted because of the existence of the Reapers as proof of what things would be like without them.

It is terribly flawed logic.

Secondly because pace was made does not guarantee that it would last, the prospect for an AI/Organic war are just as likely after peace was made as they were before peace was made.

Nor does the fact peace was made with the Geth mean future synthetic races relationships would turn out the same

tendaji:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ey1cCgdgOEw (I can't get the youtube linking to work >.<)

Javik says it really well.

But just because there is a peace between Geth and Quarians right now doesn't mean they won't grow and try to wipe out Organics further down the line. As well as Humanity has also been toying with AI systems, so what if that goes rogue and builds a massive amount of creatures that wipes out anything and everything because humanity decided not to follow Council regulations?

To me, the Reaper's Ideas make completely logical sense, if they had wiped out all synthetics and left all organics left, how long would it take for the organics to rebuild the synthetics all over again? And the entire process was pointless to complete.
Now wiping out the organics what know how to create synthetics removes any knowledge that could recreate synthetics for a large number of years, (Say up to 50,000).

^What they have said, I have always felt that the underlying essence of the Mass Effect universe was always, that as cold, unsympathetic and incomprehensible as the Reapers are to us, they are the necessary evil that preserves the continuity of organic life as a whole. It isn't the most ideal solution, but it is a solution none the less and one that has been in effect for who knows how long.

The phrase "You have more choice than you deserve" I think for me was the line that the catalyst said that really made it hit home just how methodical and unsympathetic the thinking behind it is. The fact that they even allowed us time to enjoy some merit of a civilization before being removed I guess is their way of saying what they never could, "your welcome, enjoy it while it lasts". The conversations with Sovereign and Legion are always the highlights of my playthroughs because they hint at a much darker, colder vision of the cosmos beyond anything organics could understand or accept and to me that is as fascinating as it is terrifying.

Do I agree with the Reapers? Of course not, I think its safe to say that no organic would ever agree with them if they value their soul of their culture, but in the words of Sovereign.....

"Reaper? A label created by the Protheans to give voice to their destruction. In the end, what they chose to call us is irrelevant, we simply are. Organic life is nothing but a genetic mutation, an accident. Your lives are measured in years and decades. You wither, and die. We are eternal, the pinnacle of evolution and existence. Before us, you are nothing. Your extinction is inevitable. We are the end of everything. We impose order on the chaos of organic evolution. You exist because we allow it, and you will end because we demand it".

tr00per7:

The_Blue_Rider:
Not really, what gives the Reapers the right to do what they do?
Especially when its shown Synthetics and Organics can co exist (Geth and Quarians)

nothing gives them the right but hell nothing gives us the right to stop them you could argue, but we would anyway.

geth and quarians is just one example out of an infinte universe, doesnt really hold much sway.

How about, what the ghost kid said isn't even an example, it's just a blanket assertion, so it holds no sway.

By the way, you don't know the universe is infinite (or at least certainly not the matter within the universe), neither was it ever implied that the setting of Mass Effect took place in any more than one galaxy.

Nimcha:
I'm quoting you!

SajuukKhar:
I'm quoting you too!

Alright, something just occurred to me, so I'll ask you guys, as you seem like the likeliest candidates to at least try and make sense of this.

So you're the Reapers. You're an advanced form of Synthetic, or Synthetic/Organic hybrid life. you've decided on this Cycle theory, and you set about laying out the Mass Relays and Citadel as elaborate honey traps so you can direct the growth of organic life to make things easier for yourself when it's harvesting time.

Why on earth would you not prepare them? Indoctrinate them, in a way? You're clearly familiar with the concept. Why not instill in them the idea, the religion, that every 50,000 years they're going to "ascend" or something? Why not make it positive? Why not present yourself as a friend? As a god? As a benevolent force? A protector?

Furthermore, why not make it painless? Why not make yourself appear noble? Why create the most menacing looking vessels imaginable, and then crash around exploding everything with giant lasers, while sending monstrosities bursting through doors to violently savage people? Are you not just maximizing hostility and resistance and making your job unnecessarily difficult, not to mention extraordinarily traumatic for the species you are ostensibly working to protect?

Yes and no.

I agree with them, but I wouldn't like that to happen when I'm alive. Although... I would actually. That would imply that we have space travelling which would be really cool. ^^

Now, people say look at the Quarian/Geth.

First of all, that peace was forced on the by the Reaper and Shepard. In a normal situation, there would be no peace between them.

The Geth never wanted the war, but they had to save them self. As Shepard said, they saved them self as any organic would have. The Geth are logical being, they see everything in math. What is better for the, a meaningless war, or peace where they could develop even more?
Ofc. it's peace.

But we organics aren't so. We do shit because of shit. We will do something even tho it's completely irrational and illogical. Just look at our past. Wars over a single women, slavery, hate, wars because of skin color... Even tho war was the worst option, we picked it over and over again.

Peace between the Geth and the Quarians would last until few generations later when it's forgotten why they accepted peace. A new generation will want to enslave the Geth, to reprogram them. But next time the Geth will choose to kill every Quarian. If the Quarian stat a war again, it proves that peace isn't possible. So what is better, to just push them of your world so that they can come later again or to kill every Quarian to prevent them from doing the same thing again? It's only logical to exterminate the root of the problem. As long as Quarians exist, Geth will not be safe no matter how they want it. So instead of fighting a small war over and over again, they will go all out and simply solve the problem for all times.

How will the galaxy react? You think they will accept them after doing something like that? Sooner or later someone else will start a war against the Geth. They will exterminate them also.

And if at some point the Geth become to strong for anyone else to fight them, they don't have a logical reason to keep organics alive because they will just waste the limited resources.

That is at least how I look at the situation.

I love the Geth, but coexistence isn't really possible on the long run.
Logical being can't live with illogical. We humans would start a war for some dumb shit and they wouldn't tolerate us. As I said, it's logical to solve the problem once and for all, not just for the time being. So if that means killing every entity of one species, so be it.

The only thing that could save organics from the Geth is Shepard. They don't forget the real history. We learned that during the cyber mission with Shepard. Even with the Quarians attacking them all the time, they didn't want the war. But they had no choice.
But I don't think that would keep them for too long. At some point it wouldn't be possible to stay loyal to the past if the present is trying to kill you.

IMGF:

SajuukKhar:

it is the safest and most sound plan to just kill everything over and over.

It's the easiest plan. There's no effort in that plan and there's no understanding of the value of life.

Which makes sense for the Reapers, but it's also why I believe that the Reapers were so incredibly wrong in their solution.

Actually, it's opposite of that.
The Reaper are the one which now the real value of life, which is the reason why they try to SAVE it. As I said, at some point, it's not possible to have Synthetics and Organics live in the same universe. First because we, organics, aren't logical beings and we will repeat some mistakes and go to war, second because resources are limited and it's not logical to stop your development for someone else shake. It makes sense to sacrifice your self for someone else only if you use your emotions instead of brain. Unless your sacrifice is for your races own good (i.e. Legion dying to improve all Geth).

We humans aren't able to accept someone we created as our equals. Hell, we can't accept other humans as our equals. How are we going to accept a machine that we created? We will not allow our creation to surpass us even if it means a full scale war. It's human nature to do shit.
And by human nature I mean nature of all organics.

And if the Reaper wait for too long, maybe it will be to late and even they won't be able to stop that cycle's synthetics. And by just talking with the Citadel AI, you could feel that they don't like they idea of what they are doing, but they know they have no other solution. It's not an easy plan if you have to do something that you don't want to do.

That's why they also create Reaper out of the organics they harvest. They let them "live" in Reaper form. Some sort of "sorry" for what they did. That and the fact that they need resources and wasting them isn't really smart. But they could use the resources on other, more effective ways, but they choose to keep the advanced organics "alive".

 Pages PREV 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 NEXT

Reply to Thread

This thread is locked