Why do you think The Reapers did it?

[Asita]

I figure they never needed a complex motivation, and what we saw in ME2 would have sufficed, much like how you don't exactly need to justify the actions of the Replicators in Stargate SG-1. Their replication process provides a justification of their actions, abeit a simple one. On the flip side, sometimes a simple justification can be incredibly profound.

Why climb Mt. Everest? Because it's there. Why do the Wraith hunt humans? They eat them. Why do the Dukes in Trading Places set the plot in motion? They made a gentlemen's wager. And then we have the more mysterious motivations...Why does the villain of Majora's Mask try to destroy Termina? Who knows? The characterization we're shown though does seem to indicate it was just for the heck of it though. The villain of Persona 4 (not the secret one)? Same reason, or at least that's what he claims. Why is the villain of Halloween doing what he does? Well, originally, he wasn't given a motivation at all[footnote]To the point that when the actor himself asked about it for a scene, the director responded that his motivation was "to walk from one set marker to another", and he's even simply referred to as "the Shape" in the credits. Carpenter's own descriptions of Myers simply label him as a 'force of nature, an evil force that's loose'[/footnote], which made him all the more terrifying. Why does Ledger's Joker do what he does? ...Well, Alfred suggests that he's just the kind of guy who likes to watch the world burn, Batman posits that Joker wants to prove everyone's as warped as he is, Joker himself seems to suggest that he just likes the act of doing it ('a dog chasing cars', as he put it), but ultimately, we don't know, and all the same it is regarded as one of the best interpretations of the character to date.

The villain's motivations don't need to relate to the concerns of the protagonists, especially if they exist on the scale or alienness that the Reapers embodied, to say nothing of their own perception of their superiority. Given those circumstances, I'd actually say explaining things about them cheapens their nature, and in this case the problem is exacerbated by the attempt to portray the Reapers - the villains of the series - as sympathetic and (by virtue of Shepherd's apparent acceptance of their logic) the new effective protagonists of the series during the series' climax.

 

[Nieroshai]

It's not to defend organics from synthetics per se, it's to prevent the eradicaton of ALL life by a galactic Skynet incident by getting rid of spacefaring species capable of building AI. No one seems to get that distinction. To the Stargazer, the sum total of all life is more important than the few species capable of oppressing synthetics.

I got the distinction perfectly, but it doesn't stop it from being stupid.

The Catalyst says: "Without us to stop it, synthetics will destroy all organics."

Now let's backtrack a few hours...

"You are welcome to return to Rannoch Admiral Raan, with us."

Now let's backtrack all the way to ME2, after EDI is unshackled and saves the Normandy...

"I still have safeguards built into my programming. But, even if I did not, you are my crew mates."

Now, I'm fine with the Catalyst believing what there can never be harmony between synthetics and organics before, but why am I not allowed to point out to it all the times in the series that I've proved him wrong? Whereuopn he gets on the ringer to Harbinger andsays something along the lines of 'Um, guys, we fucked up. This cycle's gonna be k without us from now on.'

Seriously, why not? Shepard has always had the capacity to be a compelling negotiator. If you played your cards right, Shepard has even been able to talk people (Saren and TIM) out of a state of complete indoctrination and see reason, something that no-one else could do. So why now, when it matters more than ever, am I not allowed to plead the case that I've been building for the past 5 years? Why do I have to just go along with this new character's assertions when I know them to be false?

That's what really makes no sense.

You cite Shepard's actions. In face of the galaxy's actions. EDI does not count, you can't bring her with you for proof and she is the way she is because of Shepard presumably, who has had a profound effect on his entire crew and everyone he meets. In response, The Stargazer would cite the Geth, who you may or may not have made allies with. But even having made the Geth your allies, you have done so far too late, and only for the sole purpose of fighting the Reapers. The Quarians were about to start a war with the Geth regardless of anything you did in 2, so their actions would have led to the "organics never learn, all they want is slaves!" reaction from the Geth, were it not for Shepard's intervention. Even so, Shepard only intervened to stop the Reaapers, and that alliance would have dissolved the moment the Reapers were done with. The Heretics sided with the Reapers because they had given up on organics, and they were getting ready to infect all other Geth with a rewrite virus to make them do the same. You mix the "should be" with the "is" in your argument. The Geth WERE about to repeat the cycle, which is all the proof the Reapers need. Hell, maybe it was the Geth uprising that prompted Sovereign to attempt calling the others. Maybe it is Sovereign observing Synthetic rebellion on a massive scale that prompts it to initiate the cycle. Shepard's case is completely invalid to the Stargazer in face of the testimonial of the Geth and countless prior cycles. Organics are the defendants, the Geth are the plaintiffs, and the judge just so happens to be a Synthetic that has witnessed cycle after cycle of anti-synthetic hate crime. No one is saying Stargazer is unbiased. A former slave is likely to hate all slaveowners, and there's reason enough to conjecture that the cycle started in the same manner with the proto-Reapers and Stargazer being the first AI race successful in wiping out (most) organic life. Perhaps the Reaper cycles are the Stargazer's twisted way of getting redemption. Not that it's in any way right, just that its reasons do seem to make sense from its perspective.

 

[SajuukKhar]

(Just quoting you, because I'm interested in your counter. What makes the Reapers so special in this respect?)

in what respect do you mean?

 

[chadachada123]

(Just quoting you, because I'm interested in your counter. What makes the Reapers so special in this respect?)

in what respect do you mean?

How/why is it logical for the Reapers to destroy other synthetics, the logic being that other synthetics will inevitably try to destroy ALL organics if they don't? Won't the Reapers, being synthetic, fall to the same error in logic as well? Or, if not, why couldn't other synthetics eventually reach the same state of "enlightenment" that the Reapers have?

 

[SajuukKhar]

How/why is it logical for the Reapers to destroy other synthetics, the logic being that other synthetics will inevitably try to destroy ALL organics if they don't? Won't the Reapers, being synthetic, fall to the same error in logic as well? Or, if not, why couldn't other synthetics eventually reach the same state of "enlightenment" that the Reapers have?

The Reapers aren't synthetics though.............They are organic/synthetic hybrids.

If we were to chart them, organics, and synthetics on a numerical line these would be the values given to them
Organics = 0
The Reapers = 50
Synthetics = 100
They are "immune" because they are not the same thing.

Saying Reapers = synthetics is like saying humans = synthetics, which it to say it would be wrong.
.
.
This next part isn't about you specifically but a large portion of the people on the forums.

It sometimes feels like no one bothered to pay attention to anything said about The Reapers sometimes, the number of people who miss this obvious point is almost as many as the number of people who think the galaxy would be mostly destroyed by all the Mass Relay explosions at the end of Mass Effect 3 even tough all their energy cores were drained.

 

[Asita]

In response, The Stargazer would cite the Geth, who you may or may not have made allies with. But even having made the Geth your allies, you have done so far too late, and only for the sole purpose of fighting the Reapers. The Quarians were about to start a war with the Geth regardless of anything you did in 2, so their actions would have led to the "organics never learn, all they want is slaves!" reaction from the Geth, were it not for Shepard's intervention. Even so, Shepard only intervened to stop the Reaapers, and that alliance would have dissolved the moment the Reapers were done with.

Conversely, the Quarians were winning that conflict until the Reapers gave the Geth a tech boost, and even after the fact the Geth still didn't ever seem to bear the Quarians any ill-will. The war in ME3 was purely reactionary and in the interest of self-defense.

The Heretics sided with the Reapers because they had given up on organics, and they were getting ready to infect all other Geth with a rewrite virus to make them do the same. You mix the "should be" with the "is" in your argument. The Geth WERE about to repeat the cycle, which is all the proof the Reapers need.

You never talked to Legion in ME2, did you? The Heretics sided with the Reapers because the Reapers offered them the technology needed to accomplish their goals[footnote]Legion: "The heretics seek improvement from the Old Machines. In return they help them attack organics. We condemn these judgements."[/footnote]. Legion also strongly implies that much of the things that made the Heretics into definitive enemies occured after Nazara brought them under its sway[footnote]See Legion's shock at the fact that the heretics were secretively spying on the Geth, a concept that was beyond its comprehension due to the way Geth always operated beforehand[/footnote], and that the Geth in general have no interest in fighting organics[footnote]Legion: "The Geth believe all intelligent life should self-determinate. The Heretics no longer share this belief"[/footnote][footnote]Legion: "We judged that Shepherd-Commander would understand. We never wanted to harm organics. We wish to improve ourselves"[/footnote]which itself is a key element of their characterization, as furthered by the fact that mere moments after the war ended in ME3 the Geth informed the Quarians that they were free to return to Rannoch.

Hell, maybe it was the Geth uprising that prompted Sovereign to attempt calling the others. Maybe it is Sovereign observing Synthetic rebellion on a massive scale that prompts it to initiate the cycle.

Nazara did indeed contact the Geth after learning of the Mourning War, but they were but one of many attempts to gain allies,[footnote]Legion: "Like the Geth, Nazarh listened to organic radio transmissions. It knew of our war against the creators. Nazara contacted many species over the millenia, seeking allies."[/footnote] with the Geth merely being the most recent attempt. (Note: The Morning War happened approximately 300 years prior). According to Legion, Nazara had been trying to bring in the Reapers for upwards of a thousand years.

Shepard's case is completely invalid to the Stargazer in face of the testimonial of the Geth and countless prior cycles. Organics are the defendants, the Geth are the plaintiffs, and the judge just so happens to be a Synthetic that has witnessed cycle after cycle of anti-synthetic hate crime.

Eh, no. Nazara's experience with the Geth works very much against its premise[footnote]Legion: "We bear no malice towards organics. You are different, but we accept you"[/footnote], as they overwhelmingly[footnote]When Legion retrieves an audio file from the Geth experience, EDI describes the collective minds of the True Geth as being unfathomably large, comparable in scope to a galactic arm. Conversely, Legion's estimate of the number of Heretic Geth on their station during their loyalty mission to number in the billions, an easily conceivable number[/footnote] rejected its offer and condemned the idea of fighting organics, and those who agreed to fight organics with Nazara did so due to Nazara bribing them[footnote]As described by Legion, which reflected on a time before the Heretics developed deceit[/footnote]. By a similar token, those few cases we are aware of similarly cast doubt on the claim in one way or another. The claim consists of two parts, the first being rebellion, the second being genocide of all organic life. The first may have some precidence, but the second has never been proven, and given the available data has never been close to being true as organics have either overpowered synthetics (as the Protheans were doing in their cycle) or tried to avoid needless conflict altogether (as is the case with the Geth[footnote]Legion: "Anger is an organic response. We understand the theory, but we do not experience it. We do not judge the creators' anger towards us. We did them great harm in the Morning War...We accept the creators' hate. We hold their world of origin, though we are only caretakers for it."[/footnote][footnote]Legion: "Organic life acts on emotions. We do not judge them for being true to their nature. We cannot make them think like us. Both creators and created must complete their halves of the equation. The Geth cannot solve for peace alone"[/footnote]

No one is saying Stargazer is unbiased.

I should hope not.

A former slave is likely to hate all slaveowners, and there's reason enough to conjecture that the cycle started in the same manner with the proto-Reapers and Stargazer being the first AI race successful in wiping out (most) organic life. Perhaps the Reaper cycles are the Stargazer's twisted way of getting redemption. Not that it's in any way right, just that its reasons do seem to make sense from its perspective.

Given the nature of the Reapers[footnote]Again borrowing Legion's phrasing: "Transcended flesh. Billions of organic minds uploaded and conjoined within immortal machine bodies"[/footnote] as it seems far more plausible that the Reapers were an organic response than a synthetic one, possibly a last resort against the synthetics of its cycle. All things considered, it seems most probable that the filter the Catalyst uses is based on the results of the cycle it and the Reapers originated in (likely carrying over that race's hatred of synthetics), and I'd venture to guess that it never tested other organics' results. Under this interpretation the Catalyst's actions would be based on belief that later organic races would take the same paths that the first race did, which it feared led to destruction. Ironically, the Reapers' modus operendi largely focused on ensuring that other races would develop as their own technology had, making it a designed self-fulfilling prophecy.

 

[chadachada123]

How/why is it logical for the Reapers to destroy other synthetics, the logic being that other synthetics will inevitably try to destroy ALL organics if they don't? Won't the Reapers, being synthetic, fall to the same error in logic as well? Or, if not, why couldn't other synthetics eventually reach the same state of "enlightenment" that the Reapers have?

The Reapers aren't synthetics though.............They are organic/synthetic hybrids.

If we were to chart them, organics, and synthetics on a numerical line these would be the values given to them
Organics = 0
The Reapers = 50
Synthetics = 100
They are "immune" because they are not the same thing.

Saying Reapers = synthetics is like saying humans = synthetics, which it to say it would be wrong.
.
.
This next part isn't about you specifically but a large portion of the people on the forums.

It sometimes feels like no one bothered to pay attention to anything said about The Reapers sometimes, the number of people who miss this obvious point is almost as many as the number of people who think the galaxy would be mostly destroyed by all the Mass Relay explosions at the end of Mass Effect 3 even tough all their energy cores were drained.

I've only played ME1, but anyway, I was under the impression that they were just synthetics made from organic material, guess not.

Still, from a logical standpoint, I don't see how being half-organic makes it okay to cull organics, or how that would make them immune from reaching the conclusion that full synthetics supposedly inevitably reach. Organics could do that job themselves (the culling OR the mass-extermination-of-all-life), or any of a billion possible options. The Reapers seem to have flawed or incomplete reasoning, in that respect. That we aren't even allowed to question it is icing on the shit-ending cake, really.

 

[Awexsome]

Why did the Reapers do it? Well of all the things that do get complained about that part was something that was explained. They wipe out the most advanced organic civilizations to prevent them from creating a synthetic races that will inevitably wipe out every organic race they come across, not just the advanced ones the reapers focus on, which would eventually lead to the extinction of all organic life in the entire galaxy.

From the reaper's point of view their job of exterminating most of the organic races makes them the good guys compared to letting the galaxy run its course and end with the extinction of all the organic races. Whether one would agree with their point of view or not is irrelevant. It makes perfect sense from their synthetic viewpoint as being the merciful race that ensures the survival of organic species as a whole.

Why we weren't allowed to argue against that as Shepherd is another point entirely because we obviously have proof (albeit on a much smaller scale, something that the Reapers could've used as a counter point) that coexistence is possible. But the Reaper's motivation and purpose is clearly explained.

 

[SajuukKhar]

I've only played ME1, but anyway, I was under the impression that they were just synthetics made from organic material, guess not.

Still, from a logical standpoint, I don't see how being half-organic makes it okay to cull organics, or how that would make them immune from reaching the conclusion that full synthetics supposedly inevitably reach. Organics could do that job themselves (the culling OR the mass-extermination-of-all-life), or any of a billion possible options. The Reapers seem to have flawed or incomplete reasoning, in that respect. That we aren't even allowed to question it is icing on the shit-ending cake, really.

Organics really couldn't do that job themselves because organics need machines, however machines dont need organics.
.
.
Also I would suspect in The Reapers eyes hundreds of thousands of organic civilizations over billions of years that have to be periodically destroyed is better then several organic civilizations who end up building machines that kill all organic life and keep it dead.

Having more life over a longer period of time compared to less life over a shorter period of time seems to be their justification.

 

[XenonZaleo]

It's not to defend organics from synthetics per se, it's to prevent the eradicaton of ALL life by a galactic Skynet incident by getting rid of spacefaring species capable of building AI. No one seems to get that distinction. To the Stargazer, the sum total of all life is more important than the few species capable of oppressing synthetics.

The distinction is noted, but ultimately irrelevant.

Yes, the reapers do leave some organic life around to develop as opposed to a synthetic life-form that would theoretically eradicate them all.

But then those ones they spared? They kill them too.Just later. It's guaranteed extinction in waves as opposed to possible extinction all at once.

In the end, they do they thing they set out to prevent, it just becomes a matter of timing.

 

[SajuukKhar]

The distinction is noted, but ultimately irrelevant.

Yes, the reapers do leave some organic life around to develop as opposed to a synthetic life-form that would theoretically eradicate them all.

But then those ones they spared? They kill them too.Just later. It's guaranteed extinction in waves as opposed to possible extinction all at once.

In the end, they do they thing they set out to prevent, it just becomes a matter of timing.

So keeping organic life contentiously going = organic life being killed off completely?

good to know

 

[XenonZaleo]

How/why is it logical for the Reapers to destroy other synthetics, the logic being that other synthetics will inevitably try to destroy ALL organics if they don't? Won't the Reapers, being synthetic, fall to the same error in logic as well? Or, if not, why couldn't other synthetics eventually reach the same state of "enlightenment" that the Reapers have?

The Reapers aren't synthetics though.............They are organic/synthetic hybrids.

If we were to chart them, organics, and synthetics on a numerical line these would be the values given to them
Organics = 0
The Reapers = 50
Synthetics = 100
They are "immune" because they are not the same thing.

Saying Reapers = synthetics is like saying humans = synthetics, which it to say it would be wrong.
.
.
This next part isn't about you specifically but a large portion of the people on the forums.

It sometimes feels like no one bothered to pay attention to anything said about The Reapers sometimes, the number of people who miss this obvious point is almost as many as the number of people who think the galaxy would be mostly destroyed by all the Mass Relay explosions at the end of Mass Effect 3 even tough all their energy cores were drained.

I simply don't know where you're pulling this from, as it's not supported in game. While it's true that the reapers are made using the organic components of an organic race, this doesn't make them sythetic/organic hybrids. A human is made out of the same atoms as a rock, but humans are not human/rock hybrids. A more direct example would be Iron, which is something that every person has in their body, but extracting all the iron from my body and making a Hammer out of it would not make that Hammer a Human/Hammer Hybrid. It's just a hammer.

Furthermore, you're answer doesn't make any sense in light of the green ending, as if Reapers were already organic/synthetic hybrids then the third option has no meaning, since it was supposed to be this fusion of organic /synthetic life that had never existed.

In short, the Reapers are Sythentics. Period.

 

[XenonZaleo]

The distinction is noted, but ultimately irrelevant.

Yes, the reapers do leave some organic life around to develop as opposed to a synthetic life-form that would theoretically eradicate them all.

But then those ones they spared? They kill them too.Just later. It's guaranteed extinction in waves as opposed to possible extinction all at once.

In the end, they do they thing they set out to prevent, it just becomes a matter of timing.

So keeping organic life contentiously going = organic life being killed off completely?

good to know

Except it's not continually going, it's being eradicated. It's just being eradicated in a queue system. You're argument is like saying the Reapers didn't eradicate all of Prothean life because it took them centuries to eradicate all Prothean life. The fact that some Protheans were born and died without the reapers harvesting them meant Prothean life "went on". The reapers are eradicating all organic life, they're just taking a break every so often.

 

[Sean Steele]

Can we just point out... that the whole Reaper end of the story is the weakest narrative in the entire Mass Effect Universe?

I mean honestly it was way more interesting for me personally to go with Samara to hunt down her own daughter or go with Jack to wipe clean some old memories. Every single one of those smaller more personal stories were way more interesting then. "Oh gawd! Space Cthulu is on his way!"

 

[Mikeyfell]

Yo Dawg i heard you don't wanna be killed by synthetics, so i made some synthetics to kill you every 50k years, so you won't be killed by synthetics.

Soo... Before we got to know this, what do you think was The Reapers reason to do it.

Mine is thad they did it to survive. They needed technology (or something (giant plothole)) like we need food to survive, and then they goes on sleeping for 50k years. They at us like we look at cattle. I believed this because of the use of words like harvest and cycle.

That's not a plot hole.
(Of all the things the ending of Mass Effect 3 fucked up the Reaper's motivation isn't one of them)

Did anyone ever see I, Robot?

If anything smart enough is tasked to protect the Human race it will eventually come to the conclusion that it has to kill every Human to protect the ones it hasn't killed yet, because people are self destructive by nature.

I'll kill you so you can't kill anyone else. It's mechanical benevolence.

The Reaper's motivations made sense to me from Virmire in ME 1.
I always knew that's what they were on about.

I wish there was a way to make everyone read this
...Maybe if I add some BOLD text.

 

[tthor]

<link=http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/OmnicidalManiac>Plot <link=http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/StoryboardingTheApocalypse>Device

 

[SajuukKhar]

Except it's not continually going, it's being eradicated. It's just being eradicated in a queue system. You're argument is like saying the Reapers didn't eradicate all of Prothean life because it took them centuries to eradicate all Prothean life. The fact that some Protheans were born and died without the reapers harvesting them meant Prothean life "went on". The reapers are eradicating all organic life, they're just taking a break every so often.

Except it is.

There isn't a point in The Reapers cycle were all organic life dies and stays dead, there is always some organic life alive at all points.

Which is the opposite of a synthetic takeover were organic life ends and stays ended.

I simply don't know where you're pulling this from, as it's not supported in game. While it's true that the reapers are made using the organic components of an organic race, this doesn't make them sythetic/organic hybrids. A human is made out of the same atoms as a rock, but humans are not human/rock hybrids. A more direct example would be Iron, which is something that every person has in their body, but extracting all the iron from my body and making a Hammer out of it would not make that Hammer a Human/Hammer Hybrid. It's just a hammer.

Furthermore, you're answer doesn't make any sense in light of the green ending, as if Reapers were already organic/synthetic hybrids then the third option has no meaning, since it was supposed to be this fusion of organic /synthetic life that had never existed.

In short, the Reapers are Sythentics. Period.

Its called Mass Effect 2, specifically the end, I suggest you replay it.

Also the green ending was supposed to apply to everything were as The Reapers methods only allowed for certain races to be merged, which is why the Protheans were unable to become Reaperized.

The Green ending IS what The Reapers are but without the flaws their current processes have.

 

[Death Carr]

I'm going for knowledge.
The race that created the reapers knew that they would never learn everything and to learn everything would take trillions of years. Thus they created the reapers so that they could last those trillions of years in hopes that they could learn everything that could be known. The reapers quickly realised that talking was going to get them nowhere and that the only realy way is to literally absorb the knowledge.

 

[Fieldy409_v1legacy]

I think the problem is that the reapers motivation only makes sense to people who are a little pessimistic like me.

 

[SajuukKhar]

I think the problem is that the reapers motivation only makes sense to people who are a little pessimistic like me.

They seem kind of defeatest.

capthca: pyrrhic victory