Mass Effect 3: It's not the endings, its the final battle (And synthesis)

[Eclectic Dreck]

Well, do remember that Saren was Sovereign's puppet in ME 1 and he still held onto the illusion of maintaining his own free will. His indoctrination was a very gradual process, so it's been established that one who is indoctrinated (or is in the process of becoming it) can still possess some degree of choice while remaining within the Reapers' influence.

In both cases of successful resistance of indoctrination, the parties in question were only able to do so after being convinced of their indoctrinated status.

Remember ME 2's Arrival DLC? (I'd put up spoiler tags, but I think we're a little beyond that in this thread now) In there, Shepard got knocked out for several days in a compound containing a huge-ass Reaper Artifact that had already indoctrinated all of the other inhabitants there. Not only does this provide a very logical point for when Shepard may have started coming under Reaper influence, it also clears up a plot hole that had previously bugged the crap out of me:

If memory serves, Shepard is unconscious for a matter of hours totaling less than one day. By contrast, the staff at Object RHO spent several months in close proximity before indoctrination took hold. In this case the initial signs where the doubts the staff had about the morality of what they were doing.

If Commander Shepard, the human who helped orchestrate the downfall of Sovereign and delayed the Reapers' return, was knocked unconscious surrounded by indoctrinated Reaper servants, why the hell didn't the Reapers just tell them to kill him/her?

The relies on a fair amount of fridge logic. Blowing up the relay delayed the invasion for months. It places Shepard on Earth where he was nearly killed on a number of occasions and was saved by the intervention of others. Moreover, this long con supposes Shepard would not simply be fast tracked to execution, extradition, and the like as a result of what appeared to be a monstrous crime.

I mean, I get it from a story-telling perspective: It's the same reason why Goldfinger straps James Bond to a table and turns on a sluggish death laser to slowly inch its way towards him-- The hero can't die, otherwise the story's done. HOWEVER, taking into consideration the Indoctrination theory, a new and, in my opinion, stronger story-telling element is introduced: Shepard would prove to be one HELL of an asset to the Reapers if they let him/her live while their claws slowly tighten over his/her mind.

As I pointed out, while this is a relatively pleasing way to tie up a plot hole, it simply doesn't work. In exchange for a known delay in their invasion the Reapers gain a single ally. They thus gamble away the element of surprise (and, as a result, take hundreds of casualties which undermines both their immediate chances as well as their long term goal of preservation) in the hope that the various species act in a fashion contrary to everything they've done thus far and not simply dispose of Shepard. Then, when Shepard manages to survive, they very nearly succeed in Killing Shepard on earth where his life is saved by luck and timely intervention of a Frigate.

They then place Shepard in direct and consistent conflict with a known agent of theirs. All based on less than a single day worth of close contact with a Reaper artifact when others have been demonstrated to be capable of resisting indoctrination for months. Demonstrated by the length of the Battle for Earth, Palivan, and literally every other planet under siege in the third game, not to mention the time required for indoctrination of Saren, Benezia, the long term resistance of the STG team on Virmire. . .

Just my opinion though. Hated the original endings; Extended Cut made them tolerable. Mass Effect's still my favorite video game series of all time.

I have adored Mass Effect but my opinion on the third game is far more favorable than most. I don't particularly like the ending but I'm willing to accept it simply because I never really believed they'd be able to pull off a satisfying one.

 

[Epic Fail 1977]

Yay! I love bitching about Mass Effect. It deserves to bitched about. Forever. Yes, you can twist that into a compliment for the series if you really, really want to.

I had lost interest in the plot and characters loooooong before the end of ME3. Yes the ending was shit, but how does that make the ending any different from the thirty hours preceding it? Honestly to this day I'm amazed that 99% of people didn't notice that Mass Effect was shit until right at the end. For me, the story got shit at the Lazarus Project and just stayed shit after that. I didn't notice any change in shitness at the end. It was just more shit on a pile of shit that had been steadily piling up over the course of two whole games. Fun gameplay though.

 

[minimacker]

I believe the indoctrination theory *was* in fact a thing. But they cut it sometime during the ME3 development. There's just too much that we learn about in ME1, 2 and 3 about it. The symptoms, the behaviour of those affected. Anderson's bulletwound, the child hallucinations, the shadow dreams, the tunnel vision, the headaches, voices-in-his-head, the radio chatter at the final battle.

It's like a tease, yanking us back at the end. "Nope! It was a story all along. Have a star child action figure and ignore everything about the geth-quarian alliance and EDI. Humans and robots can't live together. No more questions."

 

[JellySlimerMan]

And worst yet, even when explained, they still disbelieve it and would rather the creators themselves flat out told them, which probably won't happen anytime soon.

As for the Human Reaper explanation, you will find in a few post from now on (assuming that people ACTUALLY read the whole thread before dismissing everything as just whining) that, without that explanation, ME2 becomes even more pointless to the overarching plot (If the contrived Suicide Mission didnt tip you off already)

Given how the Collectors went out of their way to capture people ALIVE rather than kill them and the process them, it seems that even without that cut dialog that alive is needed in the process. But Reaper on ME3 dont show how they process people, in fact, they stomp around like Godzilla killing millions with their lazers beams, instead of using another method of capturing people alive (like maybe liquifing people with nanomachines or something). And, acording to Leviathan, the cycle ends with the creation of a Reaper, meaning that they just make ONE reaper out of hundreds that they lose in previous cycles and this one. Why would a logical calculating machine will use scare tactics of shoot everyone to death when they NEED those few precious people in MILLIONS (as EDI said) to make even ONE Reaper? its just bad resourse management.

But the Human Reaper is not the only problem of ME2, as the many videos around here will tell you. Let Shamus Young (a reviewer here from The Escapist) elaborate further, so people cant say that only the FANS have problems with it:

http://www.shamusyoung.com/twentysidedtale/?p=7004
http://www.shamusyoung.com/twentysidedtale/?p=7006
http://www.shamusyoung.com/twentysidedtale/?p=7007
http://www.shamusyoung.com/twentysidedtale/?p=11646

--

Like i said before, the 2 writers of the ending alone stated that they wanted to talk with the fans in person on a panel, but never happened.

And once again, why not? if they know their shit, then why not explain it? why take a full years to dig yourself deeper? i dont remember anyone saying that Art cannot be explained or it will lose the status of art. Like the people already said in this thread, Andy Warhold made a bussiness out of mocking art that is so stuck in his own ass that only the authors knew what it meant.

The best solution is to explain it and face criticism like all artist worth their weight in gold do.

 

[JellySlimerMan]

I believe the indoctrination theory *was* in fact a thing. But they cut it sometime during the ME3 development. There's just too much that we learn about in ME1, 2 and 3 about it. The symptoms, the behaviour of those affected. Anderson's bulletwound, the child hallucinations, the shadow dreams, the tunnel vision, the headaches, voices-in-his-head, the radio chatter at the final battle.

It's like a tease, yanking us back at the end. "Nope! It was a story all along. Have a star child action figure and ignore everything about the geth-quarian alliance and EDI. Humans and robots can't live together. No more questions."

Actually there was a leaked script with indoctrination as a possible outcome of the ending but i dont remember the link to it. You gotta find it yourself.

 

[JellySlimerMan]

Looking though the major collection of 'promises' I see plenty of vague hints but nothing concrete, nothing enough to justify going "SEE! SEE! THEY PROMISED THIS!".

1)This at 14:38.


It also includes the date when the quotes were said. You are welcome.

2)Search for the prensentation made by the Lead Cinematic Designer Armando Troisi "Get Your Game Out Of My Movie":

http://www.google.com.ar/search?q=armando+troisi+get+your+game+out+of+my+movie&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&aq=t&rls=org.mozilla:es-ARfficial&client=firefox-a

There is the video version and the Power Point version that was larger in content than the video version. It mentions that since making the narrative branch too early in the plot will be a coding nightmare to make, they leave that up to the 3rd and final game, because there wont be sequels after that, and therefore, they can make the plot go all over the place and branch much better without worring about connecting the dots if a sequel were made.

Any questions?

 

[Eclectic Dreck]

I believe the indoctrination theory *was* in fact a thing. But they cut it sometime during the ME3 development. There's just too much that we learn about in ME1, 2 and 3 about it. The symptoms, the behaviour of those affected. Anderson's bulletwound, the child hallucinations, the shadow dreams, the tunnel vision, the headaches, voices-in-his-head, the radio chatter at the final battle.

It's like a tease, yanking us back at the end. "Nope! It was a story all along. Have a star child action figure and ignore everything about the geth-quarian alliance and EDI. Humans and robots can't live together. No more questions."

In every single case, there is an alternate and reasonable explanation. The argument is predicated upon these points and ignores the mountain of evidence that suggests otherwise. There is no demonstrated mechanism in the ME universe to account for Shepard's indoctrination and the fundamental Reaper strategy of conquest by conventional arms indicates what you suggest is well beyond their power. The only demonstrated cases of indoctrination came after months of close contact.

Any argument that attempts to undermine this lack of coherent mechanism utterly destroys the entire premise of the importance of choice as a theme because if Shepard can be indoctrinated by such easy means, every major character in the story is under similar risk. At which point the story becomes "and everyone was a puppet of the reapers and their plan worked perfectly".

The argument doesn't lobby for a better ending. It is less consistent, less coherent, and less satisfying, and predicated upon discarding all knowledge about indoctrination that we can observe in support of a position backed by the most tenuous of assertions!

 

[JellySlimerMan]

Right from when you learn about the Crucible, you get theories on how it might be some sort of weapon to destroy the Reapers. That's followed up by the Illusive Man telling you that he seeks to control the Reapers. (He also mentions that he believes it to be the secret of advancing humanity's evolution, which turns out to be quite ironic.)

Don't forget the Reaper-Destroyer on Rannoch as well, which further alludes to the Reapers "saving" organic life and has the Reaper mention organic/synthetic conflict.

Most notably, there's Vendetta, who tells you that the Reapers appear to be the servants of the cycle rather than its creator and who tells you more information on the Catalyst and the Crucible.

Then there's Horizon, where you learn that Cerberus has indeed made breakthrough in controlling husks, showing that controlling the Reapers may not be so far-fetched.

You dont get how overarching plot works, do you? If "Synthetics WILL (absolutist statement) destroy ALL Organics" was the theme all along of the series, then it would have appeared on ME1. Hell, Sovereing could have told us right on the spot that they do that to save us (instead of: "Organic life is an accident" "We are free of all weakness" villian monologue) It will be crazy and, efectively, "beyond our comprehention". Then the narrative of the rest of the games would show that Synthetics indeed ALWAYS rebel against their creators AND want to eliminate all organic life. That is how stories work, you stablish your theme/idea early and demostrate with proof ON the narrative how such thing happen in the first place.

But that never happened. The Geth didnt rebel UNTIL the organic striked FIRST (the Quarians) and when the Geth won they just left the Quarians alone and went on isolation from any organic race ever.


26:42 to jump to the Starchild section from the beggining (after The Citadel open its arms), and 37:54 for when The Catalyst reveals the REAL overarching plot of the Mass Effect series.

The "foreshadowing" you speak is nothing when it is not elaborated further by the plot or the characters. Compare that to Casey Hudson favorite game "Deus Ex 1". All the plot revolves around what eventually will be the 3 choices of the ending we have in that game (Who in NO WAY are similar to ME3 endings. No sir) Even to the very last moments, the CONS and PROS of the endings are discussed in detail by the characters (including the protagonist)


ME3 (or ME in general) doesnt go into detail and the protagonist doesnt even voice its opinion on what would be like if such scenerios could be acomplished. You may say that the Saren boss fight in ME1 proves that Shep doesnt aprove of merging synthetics and organics to survive, but that is nor correct. Shep doesnt go into detail by saying that such thing is wrong, instead he/she says that Saren is wrong because he is being controlled by Reapers. Basically, Shep pulled an Ad Hominen on Saren (wrong by association, not the argument itself)

Shep does this AGAIN with TIM on The Citadel when they had to open the Citadel arms on ME3. Its ammounts to "You are indoctrinated, you are wrong" but no mention of how is exactly "wrong" to also control Reapers, or at least destroy ALL reapers except one or even Harbinger to reverse engineer (he/she attacks the person rather than the argument). After all, humanity only needed ONE Mass Relay to advance technologically. Shep does mention that we cant control Reapers because "We are not ready" but that is all.

How are we (humanity and the alliance of all the galaxy) not ready? I was expecting for TIM (back in the Cerberus Base assult) to ilustrate his point of controlling the reapers by comparing it with the Mass Relay discovery, the same dialog said later on the game but much earlier. He would basically challenge Shepard with:

TIM: "If being asociated with the Reapers in any way is wrong to you, then why are you using that suit and that gun?? they were develop with Mass Effect technology, a gift from the Reapers along with the Mass Relays and The Citadel, after all. Or even better, why use violence at all when its the same method that Reapers use??"

Shep: "Dont you DARE tell me what is wrong. This is nesesary for survival"

TIM: "And so is controlling the Reapers. Your people already got many advancements out of the Reapers to improve your lives, and yet this ONE extra thing that you will steal from the Reapers is just wrong?? Care to ilustrate how is this ANY different?"

Shep: "...."

TIM: "Just what i thought. But before i leave you with Kai Leng, let me tell you something about Legion. The audio reports i obtained tells me that your friend believes that Geth chooses its own path in life, and by using Reaper technology, they are using the path forged by others. I wonder how he didnt even notice that the very ship he was standing on, The Normandy, and every equipment that your squadmates use, are based on Reaper tech. I dont know if a robot can feel at all, but sure as hell he was feeling anger at the irony. Maybe he sacrificed himself not because he wanted the Geth to become Free Willed beings, but because he couldnt tolerate being "alive" with an hypocrite like you, Shepard"

And then the rest of the endgame would be Shepard considering and discussing the benefits of controlling the Reapers or the ideas of Saren that he/she dissmissed by asociation.

If the endings were foreshadowed in anyway and discussed, then people wouldn't have found them so thematically repugnant:
http://awtr.wikidot.com/long:this-is-not-a-pipe

If the game cared to elaborate the point of the Reapers, then people wouldn't believe that the 3 choices represent all the things that the Reapers do because that is the ONLY perspective they have: Control = Indoctrination, Synthesis = Huskyfication, Destroy = Genocide of synthetics (a more simpler solution to the "Synthetics will destroy all organics" that the Reapers where trying to solve).

If the audience had Shepard elaborating his own vision and opinion, then they wouldn't feel so horrified of choosing the enemies method.

 

[JellySlimerMan]

I believe the indoctrination theory *was* in fact a thing. But they cut it sometime during the ME3 development. There's just too much that we learn about in ME1, 2 and 3 about it. The symptoms, the behaviour of those affected. Anderson's bulletwound, the child hallucinations, the shadow dreams, the tunnel vision, the headaches, voices-in-his-head, the radio chatter at the final battle.

It's like a tease, yanking us back at the end. "Nope! It was a story all along. Have a star child action figure and ignore everything about the geth-quarian alliance and EDI. Humans and robots can't live together. No more questions."

In every single case, there is an alternate and reasonable explanation. The argument is predicated upon these points and ignores the mountain of evidence that suggests otherwise. There is no demonstrated mechanism in the ME universe to account for Shepard's indoctrination and the fundamental Reaper strategy of conquest by conventional arms indicates what you suggest is well beyond their power. The only demonstrated cases of indoctrination came after months of close contact.

Any argument that attempts to undermine this lack of coherent mechanism utterly destroys the entire premise of the importance of choice as a theme because if Shepard can be indoctrinated by such easy means, every major character in the story is under similar risk. At which point the story becomes "and everyone was a puppet of the reapers and their plan worked perfectly".

The argument doesn't lobby for a better ending. It is less consistent, less coherent, and less satisfying, and predicated upon discarding all knowledge about indoctrination that we can observe in support of a position backed by the most tenuous of assertions!

Not to mention, Vendetta actually CAN detect indoctrination, and would have discovered it already by being close to Shepard.

And if Indoctrination is such a problem, then why no one makes contac with Shiala from Mass Effect 1 after she and other people survived The Thorian and develop immunety to indoctrination? making biological research would have been nice to make sure that everyone CAN survive indoctrination. Who wouldnt mass produce vaccine or tech for anti-indoctrination for all the galaxy to benefit?

And then there is this reasoning of why Indoc doesnt work:

 

[minimacker]

I believe the indoctrination theory *was* in fact a thing. But they cut it sometime during the ME3 development. There's just too much that we learn about in ME1, 2 and 3 about it. The symptoms, the behaviour of those affected. Anderson's bulletwound, the child hallucinations, the shadow dreams, the tunnel vision, the headaches, voices-in-his-head, the radio chatter at the final battle.

It's like a tease, yanking us back at the end. "Nope! It was a story all along. Have a star child action figure and ignore everything about the geth-quarian alliance and EDI. Humans and robots can't live together. No more questions."

In every single case, there is an alternate and reasonable explanation. The argument is predicated upon these points and ignores the mountain of evidence that suggests otherwise. There is no demonstrated mechanism in the ME universe to account for Shepard's indoctrination and the fundamental Reaper strategy of conquest by conventional arms indicates what you suggest is well beyond their power. The only demonstrated cases of indoctrination came after months of close contact.

During Mass Effect 1, Sovereign is (paraphrasing Saren's words) very impressed with Shepard's immense endurance and willpower.

And I still don't have a clear answer why Shepard can see the ghost-boy at the start of ME3. He's not real, since he just vanishes after Anderson calls for Shepard.

And finally no, I'm not saying the indoctrination theory is the final ending. What I am saying is that it must have been the main focus, but they cut it. They left all these pieces of the puzzle in, but decided to throw away the last two pieces into the trash. Apparently, there's a script leak floating around where the last scene (with the star child), is actually a garden. With trees. And grass. A hallucination or a dream sequence.

Hell, they even forgot to take the garden-reflection on the table out in the final game.

 

[___________________]

You know what? You're right. It's not the endings it's the lack of pay off. I have to buy you a beer man.

 

[Eclectic Dreck]

And I still don't have a clear answer why Shepard can see the ghost-boy at the start of ME3. He's not real, since he just vanishes after Anderson calls for Shepard.

He's having a dream. The child is one he failed to save - one of many along the way. That he has odd dreams centering around the child isn't terribly strange.

And finally no, I'm not saying the indoctrination theory is the final ending. What I am saying is that it must have been the main focus, but they cut it. They left all these pieces of the puzzle in, but decided to throw away the last two pieces into the trash. Apparently, there's a script leak floating around where the last scene (with the star child), is actually a garden. With trees. And grass. A hallucination or a dream sequence.

I still don't buy it for the same set of reasons. Unless ME3 went a remarkably different way than what we saw, all of the problem I talked about still exist and the problems of thematic consistency remain regardless.

Given what Mass Effect has stood for, having the PC become indoctrinated is just about the single worst move they could make.

 

[ThriKreen]

Out of interest, would you mind telling us your understanding of what the Collectors were doing and what the purpose of the Human Reaper was?

Well, let's start off with what we know (and the chapter in brackets):

- Reapers destroy all (advanced) life in the galaxy in a cycle every 50,000 years or so (1, whole trilogy premise)
- They obviously avoid primitive life, like humans who were still in hunter-gatherer tribes last cycle (verified in 3).
- So they knew about us several cycles ago, hence the creation and placement of the Mass Relay at Pluto (1) (Oooo the bait has been set in their trap)
- The Protheans also knew about us as well, hence the placement of their base (and beacon?) on Mars (prelude to 1, obviously had to use said Pluto Mass Relay to visit)
- Keepers were a former race, harvested but deemed not suitable for "Reaper-ness" (1 or 2)
- Collectors are Protheans (2)
- Like Keepers, Collectors were deemed not suitable for "Reaper-ness" (2)
- Collectors are kidnapping humans (2)
- Collectors are kidnapping SPECIFIC humans with SPECIFIC DNA (2)
- IMPORTANT: Collectors were VERY interested in Shepard's body (2, between intro, comic with Liara recovering the body, resurrection)
- It's not destroying life, but harvesting (2)
- Humans were reduced into component goo and used for the Human-Reaper construction (2)
- This is how they "procreate" (2)
- Said Human-Reaper is about what, 50m tall or so, but the main Reaper ships like Sovereign are over 2km long. Obviously the actual reaper sits inside the ship, and we have no idea how integrated the hook ups are (no large mechanical creature body was found in Sovereign's wreckage) (1, 2)
- Humans were said to have advanced within the council races much faster than the others in comparison. Maybe aggressively so. (1)
- A lot of DNA diversity in humanity, compared to other races
- Asari frown on asari-asari couplings, and prefer other races to integrate their DNA/behaviour to enrich their own (1)
- Can be seen as to not create a stagnant DNA pool, have to continue to add, change and evolve (1 I think, important hint)

What we can draw from them:

- Aside from what they were doing, also note what they were NOT doing:
- Collectors did not harvest the other races at all, despite some races like the asari being (arguably) more advanced, the krogan more physically powerful, etc. (2)
- And on the same note, why move the Citadel to Earth instead of to the other races' homeworlds? (3)
- Despite being more advanced than any other race for the previous cycle or this one, the Protheans did not ascend as a Reaper (2)
- So it's not just the current technology level that determines Reaper validity, but something in the race itself
- Something about humanity is seen as desirable for "Reaper-ness" over the others (2)
- DNA, potential? Both? Whatever the case is, Humans > Protheans
- One problem with the cycle system is that even after ascending, they end up sleeping for very long periods between cycles. You end up not doing much in that period. Things can get rather ... stagnant.
- You can conclude they hit some sort of dead-end in regards to their "problem" (dark energy, synthetic-organic war, whatever)
- Hence the harvesting and promotion of a race to preserve them (confirmed in 3) - and adding to their pool.
- Like they were hunting for a race that could push and solve their problem (not just preserve)?
- Like humans?
- Like Cmdr. Shepard?

Also, I'll bring up this phrase from ME1 that people seem to have forgotten: "You must become the tip of the spear of humanity..." - I don't think it meant as just a weapon against threats.

And, out of further interest, have you read or heard the ending Drew Karpyshyn intended for the series he started

Yes, it's safe to say I know quite a bit about the ME universe, probably moreso than everyone here.

 

[Verrik]

Why are people still complaining? I mean, I was all for changing the ending, but we already got that. It's been months since EC was released, so I don't understand why the hell this topic is getting necro'd again and again.

If you were still unsatisfied after EC, then you have two options: play the earlier games and erase ME3 from your head-canon, or simply stop playing and stop spreading the grief to the rest of us who've moved on.

Why are people still complaining about people complaining? Don't wanna see people beat a dead horse? Then avoid the topic. From the Title alone, you know what you're in for if you click on this post. Just because some would rather not talk about it anymore doesn't mean that everyone else feels the same way.

OT: Yep, agreed. How awesome would it have been to see Grunt and Wrex suddenly come out from around the corner when Shepard is having trouble, beat the crap out of some husks, and while they're covered in the blood and guts of their foes, turn around and say in unison, "Shepard".

 

[Verrik]

STOP STOP STOP STOP IT WE HAVE HAD THIS TALK A THOUSAND TIMES AND i am sick of seeing this I used to hate the ending but I just stoped caring about it and the series can we please stop talking about it the horse is already died everything has already been said

Like I said to the other guy, why even bother clicking on this post if you know you're not gonna like the topic? If you keep reading forum discussions about Mass Effect 3, you have no one to blame but yourself since you could have easily just passed this one up and gone to another topic. It's not like there is a lack of forum discussions to choose from.

The fact that you clicked on this discussion titled "MASS EFFECT 3 IT'S NOT THE ENDINGS IT'S THE FINAL BATTLE AND SYNTHESIS" (not like the title was misleading or anything) means that, no, despite what you say you haven't stopped caring about it or you wouldn't be here.

 

[lacktheknack]

Y'know, I'm pretty sure the dead horse is practically a zombie by this stage.

Nope.

It's a fine paste, consisting of bones ground into plaster of Paris, combined with a fluid that has the chemical composition of horse flesh but is as viscous as water, made into a paste that the finest sous-chefs would kill to match the consistency of in their finest French Silk pies.

And that paste has been trodden into the Earth, combined into the dirt to make the most wonderful soil with no trace of horse in it, aside from composition.

And then we crushed and beat the soil until every last drop of nutrients could be pulled from it, and in the nutritious soup, a large and glorious tree grew, growing taller than all other trees because of how many nutrients were packed into the soil. It grew tall and mighty.

And then we took our clubs and we BEAT that tree. We beat the tree until it groaned in agony and collapsed. Then we beat and beat and beat and beat it until every last part of it was sawdust, save for one knobbly chunk from the center. Then we took that chunk, and used it to beat that goddamned horse-dust some more.

OT: You missed the boat by about ten months. Let. It. Go.

 

[DioWallachia]

Out of interest, would you mind telling us your understanding of what the Collectors were doing and what the purpose of the Human Reaper was?

Well, let's start off with what we know (and the chapter in brackets):

- Reapers destroy all (advanced) life in the galaxy in a cycle every 50,000 years or so (1, whole trilogy premise)
- They obviously avoid primitive life, like humans who were still in hunter-gatherer tribes last cycle (verified in 3).
- So they knew about us several cycles ago, hence the creation and placement of the Mass Relay at Pluto (1) (Oooo the bait has been set in their trap)
- The Protheans also knew about us as well, hence the placement of their base (and beacon?) on Mars (prelude to 1, obviously had to use said Pluto Mass Relay to visit)
- Keepers were a former race, harvested but deemed not suitable for "Reaper-ness" (1 or 2)
- Collectors are Protheans (2)
- Like Keepers, Collectors were deemed not suitable for "Reaper-ness" (2)
- Collectors are kidnapping humans (2)
- Collectors are kidnapping SPECIFIC humans with SPECIFIC DNA (2)
- IMPORTANT: Collectors were VERY interested in Shepard's body (2, between intro, comic with Liara recovering the body, resurrection)
- It's not destroying life, but harvesting (2)
- Humans were reduced into component goo and used for the Human-Reaper construction (2)
- This is how they "procreate" (2)
- Said Human-Reaper is about what, 50m tall or so, but the main Reaper ships like Sovereign are over 2km long. Obviously the actual reaper sits inside the ship, and we have no idea how integrated the hook ups are (no large mechanical creature body was found in Sovereign's wreckage) (1, 2)
- Humans were said to have advanced within the council races much faster than the others in comparison. Maybe aggressively so. (1)
- A lot of DNA diversity in humanity, compared to other races
- Asari frown on asari-asari couplings, and prefer other races to integrate their DNA/behaviour to enrich their own (1)
- Can be seen as to not create a stagnant DNA pool, have to continue to add, change and evolve (1 I think, important hint)

What we can draw from them:

- Aside from what they were doing, also note what they were NOT doing:
- Collectors did not harvest the other races at all, despite some races like the asari being (arguably) more advanced, the krogan more physically powerful, etc. (2)
- And on the same note, why move the Citadel to Earth instead of to the other races' homeworlds? (3)
- Despite being more advanced than any other race for the previous cycle or this one, the Protheans did not ascend as a Reaper (2)
- So it's not just the current technology level that determines Reaper validity, but something in the race itself
- Something about humanity is seen as desirable for "Reaper-ness" over the others (2)
- DNA, potential? Both? Whatever the case is, Humans > Protheans
- One problem with the cycle system is that even after ascending, they end up sleeping for very long periods between cycles. You end up not doing much in that period. Things can get rather ... stagnant.
- You can conclude they hit some sort of dead-end in regards to their "problem" (dark energy, synthetic-organic war, whatever)
- Hence the harvesting and promotion of a race to preserve them (confirmed in 3) - and adding to their pool.
- Like they were hunting for a race that could push and solve their problem (not just preserve)?
- Like humans?
- Like Cmdr. Shepard?

Also, I'll bring up this phrase from ME1 that people seem to have forgotten: "You must become the tip of the spear of humanity..." - I don't think it meant as just a weapon against threats.

And, out of further interest, have you read or heard the ending Drew Karpyshyn intended for the series he started

Yes, it's safe to say I know quite a bit about the ME universe, probably moreso than everyone here.

Lets see, what did i miss?

Wasnt the question of the guy you quoted something around "what was the purpose of the Human Reaper IN Mass effect 2?" as presented in that game back when it came out? because you are using knowledge of ME3 to solve a question that no one knew back in 2010. They just knew that they needed Soylent Green because humans are somehow more genetically diverse than the other races (this is not true even in real life, plants are more diverse than us) but the question that the Human Reaper presented (when we didnt know that Reapers preserve life) is: Why does an mechanical race of techno-gods need ants like us to procreate and how is liquifing humans going to be any use for them as a building material?

When we get to ME3 we know that is to somehow "preserve" us, but never stated clear how is making people into liquid = preservation?? are the people inside a Reaper still councious in some way even if they dont have a brain (nor a body with that brain?? Would it be possible for an Asari to read the minds inside a Reaper to confirm that they are, indeed, still alive but trapped in a shell? if they are still concious then what is their opinion on the fact that they are begin forcefully preserved?? are they still even sane after MILLIONS of years?? if they become insane with immortality, doesnt that mean that the Reapers are part of the problem of "Synthetics Vs Organics"? after all, organics will find a that a quick death eases all pain but an eternity in a prision is the very definition of Hell or Purgatory, thus making even more damage to Organics than a simple robot could do. Can The Catalyst even talk to the people inside the Reapers since he is supposed to be "the Collective intelligence of all Reapers"? Is the Catalyst the sum of all people INSIDE the Reapers or the sum of all mechanical AI that moves the shell around WITH the persons inside? If the people become insane or even change in some way by being inside a Reaper, how is that preserving?? if i put a sandwich in my fridge, i expect it to still be fresh and edible (preserved) and not change into a bacteria ecosystem.

This of course has a simple solution that BW somehow cut out of the second game for no reason: the preservation method that was cut shows that, basically, is like taking a Polaroid Camera and take a photo at the people that you want forever preserved in the image........at the expense of their material bodies. The data of this "polaroid" is stored in a Reaper neural network and will remain there forever until the Reaper shell dies. It will be like me preserving your comment in this post by copy pasta it to a Text Document.txt where it will remain there unchanged.

But that, however, requires the humans to be alive because the brain (where the expenriences are stored and what the Reapers want to preserve) degrade too quickly when dead. Leviathan also mentions that each cycle ends with the creation of a Reaper, meaning that whoever candidate for Reaper was, it is not enough to create more than just one. But if numbers are so important for the Reaper creation, then why are Reapers using laser beams or methods that kill more humans than it should be acceptable to their needs? why not use Seeker Swarms like the Collectors? dont tell me that the Reapers cant use their mighty and efficient collective intelligence to make something similar or more effective to neutralize humans from escaping and without killing the humans that have weapons at their disposal? doesnt the word "Nanomachines" rings a well to their eternal lifespan of seeing many types of technology of many civilizations?? Seeing those humans on The Citadel after entering The Conduit seems like a waste of time, the best they could do with those is making Husks but not Reaper material after being dead for so long.

 

[DioWallachia]

And then we took our clubs and we BEAT that tree. We beat the tree until it groaned in agony and collapsed. Then we beat and beat and beat and beat it until every last part of it was sawdust, save for one knobbly chunk from the center. Then we took that chunk, and used it to beat that goddamned horse-dust some more.

OT: You missed the boat by about ten months. Let. It. Go.

Mnn....not sure if trully dead. It has components of Deus Ex Machina, that horse of yours. It may sudendly and contrivedly ressurect.

We may need to send the dust to a black hole, just in case.

 

[DioWallachia]

And I still don't have a clear answer why Shepard can see the ghost-boy at the start of ME3. He's not real, since he just vanishes after Anderson calls for Shepard.

Because it's certainly not like the vent continued on beyond what you could see and the child simply scurried away when you looked towards Anderson. It was just a vent that went nowhere.

Because people make dead-end vents that go nowhere. XD

Given the tone of that other quote, i would say that he firmly belives in the Indoctrination Theory, but since BW already said with the EC that such thing doesnt exist and the narrative Pre-EC says that Shep isnt indoc because Vendetta didnt say anything about it, that is the least of his problems.

I, however, would be worried about Shepard ability to hear and UN-hear things when its convenient for the plot, and he/she/it is supposed to be a transhuman cyborg after being ressurrected by Cerberus.

It can hear a child moving throught the ventilation in the middle of all the chaos outside but cant hear the kid when its gone? (the same sound at the beggining doesnt play, it just plays the "Reaper Roar" that the Indoc people think its a sign). Shep also CANT hear Kai Leng getting up and moving slowly and getting louder and louder, closer and closer up to where he can stab him/her/it? Use this as a frame of reference:


If BW wanted that kid to be remotelly likable, it would have been prudent to just let it tell us why "we cant help him" and why playing Solid Snake in the vents is much safer than being close to the Protagonist.

That is a fascinating article. And by "fascinating", I mean "absolutely astounding how ending-bashers will go to absurd and completely illogical lengths in order to complain about having to make a difficult choice that impacts the galaxy at the end of a series about making difficult choices that impact the galaxy".

So you never made a difficult decition provided by dubious means? by a person you dont trust because he contradics himself at every turn (the narrative proves him wrong). A person that doesnt show evidence of its claims nor tries to convince you of what i means to be a Reaper. A person that, so far, was your worst enemy a minute ago and suddendly wants to help you.... even when behind you, he is destroying the Crusible after he admited that its the ideal solution to his problems by using synthesis. A person that fails to see that Synthesis DOESNT solve his problem in the long run because nothing stops organic people (or the new synthesis hybrid) from making a Super Organic creation (like a super soldier) and THEN get wiped out by it; Or making synthetic life again after a need that an hibrid cannot do AND then get wiped out. A person that you have no reason to trust after all that short of time and that failed first impresion, and the only way that you could know if he is telling the truth is by trial and error or being able to read the script ahead and confirm that the options do exactly like he says they do.

But that wouldnt be real, isnt it?? stories are made to be as close (belivable) as possible to the real world, this way, people can relate to its characters because those characters would act in the same way a real person would do. But here, no rational being would try this options at all. In a videogame world, however, there is no problem with that, because you can just load a save and try another option even if the protagonist/avatar likes it or not.

And this, ladies and gentlemen, is why the endings, or more precicely Casey Hudson, failed. He wanted to avoid the "videogamey" that ruin the believability of videogame stories (as he said on the interview of "The Final Hours of ME3"). But in the end, if instead of making us feel this:

"I have to think very carefully about my next choice. Shepard will change life as it is, forever. There is so much pressure behind my shoulders that i can feel what Shepard is feeling right now, we both want to best for all our friends and the galaxy and only one of these can bring peace. Now is it the time to make history"

We were thinking this:
"Man, whatever. Lets just pick a color and in any case i can reload if i dont like it. Lets choose Control so i can show my new Reaper dick to my love interest"

Then Hudson failed. He failed his vision.

There is making a difficult choices, and there is commiting mental suicide by abandon all logic.

Are you the kind of person that grabs whatever is there on the fridge and eats it without knowing what it is or why its pulsating?