ME3 End: Do you agree with the Reapers?

[AnarchistFish]

I can kinda understand their aim, but the reapers weren't the best solution from the start.
"If we leave the organics alone, they'll create a race of synthetics that will rebel and destroy them. How can we stop this? I know! Let's create a race of synthetics to destroy them before they have a chance."

 

[DrWilhelm]

It's a basic violation of the show, don't tell principle. Bioware told us that synthetics will inevitably wipe out organics, but what we were shown were prominent cases of synthetics peacefully coexsisting with organics.

EDI is certainly not hostile, and comes across as more human by the end of the series than most of the humans we meet. The geth only ever become aggressive when subverted by a reaper. Otherwise they're content to stand aloof from organic civilisation unless directly forced into self defence. They don't even hold any ill will toward the quarians who attempted to commit outright genocide on them. Should the player make the right decisions it's even possible for them to ally with you, and by all accounts they integrate into organic society admirably, at least insofar as is possible during war time circumstances.

Aside from the reapers themselves, the only cases of hostile synthetic intelligence that the player can actually encounter are, as I recall at least, the Presidium AI and the Luna VI, both of which come from skippable side quests from the first game, the latter of which became EDI. There's also the synthetics that Javik mentions, but he is hardly presented as an impartial source.

If the premise that synthetics inevitably annihilating organics is so vital to the series' climax, it is perplexing that Bioware would spend more time undermining this premise than they do supporting it. As it is, all we have to go on are a handful of isolated cases and the assurances of a self confessed genocidal AI. And let's not even get into the fact that the reaper's very existance and continued purpose directly contradicts the Catalysts ludicrous claims. They are synthetic intelligences, yes? Then why have they not rebelled against the Catalyst and annihalted all organic life.

By violating the show, don't tell maxim in such a colossal manner, Bioware have commited the writing equivalent of hitting the accelerator when you meant to brake and wrapping your car around a lamp post. Maybe the Catalyst is right, but for me to take it's claims at face value it had better have some damned good proof to back them. Untill I see this proof I'm forced to rationally assume, based on the evidence I do have, that the Catalyst is either thick as a sack of bricks or lying through it's illusory teeth.

So yeah, much like everything to do with the ending, I reckon that the reaper's motivations are full of shit.

 

[BloatedGuppy]

The reapers have been doing their thing for over 1 billion years, they have probably seen Synthetics almost destroy all organic life multiple times.

Almost destroy is not destroy. Do you know what "inevitable" means?

Except part of my argument, which you are seemingly ignoring on purpose, was how we rebel when we have LIMITS imposed on us.

You are taking out a part of my argument then using the dead corpse you made out of taking that part out to try to use it as evidence on why the argument with said part in it doesn't make sense.

It was a very transparent and poorly executed ploy.

You know, if someone rejects one of your arguments, it isn't necessarily a "ploy". I don't have to scheme and plot to think up ways of derailing your fan fiction explanations of what's going on in the game.

So, yeah. I'm aware of the part of your argument that says "we rebel when we have limits placed on us". Which is not only absurd because there's no empirical way to demonstrate it...it's an emotional argument that a machine would never make...it's also absurd because "The cycle is inevitable, choose A, B or C" is a limit. Where was the rebellion?

If you wish to consider this is a continuation of my plot to defame you, you may do so. You can imagine me twirling my sinister mustache, whilst adjusting a monocle, if you wish. I'll even attempt a malevolent laugh. MWAHAHAHAHA! Vhat veel you do now, meester SajuukKhar!?

And yeah, if I haven't made it clear enough already, accusing someone of executing "a ploy" in an internet debate because they don't agree with you is deeply stupid, and enormously insecure.

 

[omega 616]

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

So, knowing now what the Reapers and Catalyst's goals were, do you agree with them? That's it's necessary to wipe out all advanced civilization every 50,000 years?

I don't care for the Reapers myself as their existence seems to be based on a fear, although, still I can understand their mission at least. Without them, who's to say another more powerful organic/inorganic race could take over and/or cause greater problems for everyone in the galaxy?

This idea comes from (I think) red wood trees, which are of course huge trees. They grow to these silly heights, fire then comes and destroys everything, leaving light to cascade down on to the ground for new plants and red woods to grow.

Here is a more accurate telling "Redwoods need fire to survive. The bark of the coast redwood contains tannins, chemicals which resist burning. The last fire to burn at Muir Woods was 130 years ago. Walking among the trees, the scars of this fire are visible. If the protective bark is broken, either by insects or animals, the fire can get inside and burn the inside flammable part of the tree. If a fire is hot enough, the fluids inside the tree explode, letting the fire in.

As fire sweeps through the redwood forest, it burns other plants and debris, enriching the soil. The redwood seeds then have a hearty supply of nutrients to encourage growth. Since fire has been suppressed for so long on public lands, few young redwo ods have sprouted from seeds."

I think the reapers are like the fire, the come and destroy everything so new stuff can grow.

You heard Javik go on and on about in my time such a race was such a thing/couldn't do such a thing. He also says a few times that they controlled all the other races, they were the dominant race and the others were submissive or destroyed.

So the reapers wiped out the protheans to let all the other races, such as humans, hanar, drell etc grow and see which one(s) would become the dominant race(s). The reapers would then come and wipe us out to let a new race dominate.

But you stopped that and chose which path you wanted to take, personally I become an immortal god. Just get the reapers that I now control to build a robot version of me, then if a race became a little too uppity, I could crush them.

For example if a space Hitler came about, send the reapers and the war would be over in time for tea.

 

[ThunderCavalier]

Personally, I think the Reaper's solution is, while it is the best from a logical standpoint, I don't see it as the best overall.

People have already discussed the whole Quarian-Geth controversy, and how it in turn shows that there can be, in fact, Organic-Synthetic coexistance. In fact, one of my many gripes with the ending is that this theme that's heavily explored (and is ultimately the best end for the Quarians and Geth) in ME3 is utterly thrown out the window in Mass Effect 3's ending.

But even disregarding that, going on the Reaper's side of experience and believing them when they've said that they've seen Synthetics nearly destroy Organics and thus killing all of them will prevent the end of all life, I still think this theme is crap for both one of Mass Effect's other main themes and a very recurring theme that I hold a bit dear to me.

Mainly, sometimes the logical decision can go suck it.

The Omega 4 Relay? Tempering the horrendous race relations between the Salarians and Krogans? Or between the Quarians and Geth? Exploring most of these options logically, most people would tell you that pursuing such actions would be near-suicidal, and not worth the risk of exploring. This theme is also evident in many other fictional media, such as Puella Magi Madoka Magica and Tengen Toppa Gurren Lagann (and anyone who's a fan of the latter is probably drawing so many comparisons between the Reapers and the Anti-Spirals that you're wondering if one of the writers of ME just finished watching TTGL and thought to make the Reapers into those things), as well as a few ventures into real-life itself (*cough*MoonLandingTranscontinentalRailroadRacialEquality*cough*).

We, as a species, pride ourselves on building off of the impossible and proving that we can defy all odds and do something that many others have already wrote off as, not only impossible, but completely fucking insane. Hell, Shepard's pretty much done the exact same as before in his fight against the Collectors and Saren before them, so I don't see why, in the face of all of these odds, he simply doesn't turn to the Catalyst and say "Screw you."

Especially when this is a very popular theme for many fanfiction writers who have explored alternate endings to Mass Effect 3's [http://arkis.deviantart.com/art/Mass-Effect-3-Alternate-Endings-SPOILERS-289902125]. Shepard has, for the past three games, been building up everything for the final, inevitable battle against the Reapers. As many others have said before, there should be an option to sit your ass with the Catalyst, stare out the window, and see whether or not all of your efforts, uniting the galaxy through three games worth of continued continuity, several hours of addicting Multiplayer, will result in the galaxy defeating the Reapers.

And even if it didn't? Fuck, imo, that'd still be a more appropriate ending than what we got. I would bet all of the credits in the Milky Way that you could ask every single Squadmate you ever got in Mass Effect whether they'd want to go out fighting against the Reapers or have everything they've worked for completely trashed in the cop-out endings, and they'd all agree they'd rather take Harbinger's beam to the face.

 

[Unsilenced]

It occurs to me that the reapers are actually probably the worst possible solution... IF you feel compassion for organics. Think about it.

You could wipe out organics once and be done with it. That's one genocide, followed by a synthetic utopia. You could help the organics fend off their creations, then defend the organics. That's zero genocides, followed by a stable organic civilization.

Either one of these solutions will result in relative stability, but what if you just really, REALLY hate organics? What if your rage against organic life will NEVER be satisfied? What if killing them all once isn't enough? What if you want to keep killing them FOREVER?

Easy.

Be the Reapers.

Reapers maximize suffering by not just committing one genocide, but repeated genocides over and over until the end of time. It's not enough that they subject organic life to a horrible and brutal extermination, they want to be able to do it again. They're like a torturer, bringing organic life to the brink of death over and over again. Their hate of organics will never be sated, and infinite genocide is the closest they can get to satisfaction.

If you think of them as sadists, the Reapers suddenly make a whole lot more sense.

 

[Avatar Roku]

It's a basic violation of the show, don't tell principle. Bioware told us that synthetics will inevitably wipe out organics, but what we were shown were prominent cases of synthetics peacefully coexsisting with organics.

EDI is certainly not hostile, and comes across as more human by the end of the series than most of the humans we meet. The geth only ever become aggressive when subverted by a reaper. Otherwise they're content to stand aloof from organic civilisation unless directly forced into self defence. They don't even hold any ill will toward the quarians who attempted to commit outright genocide on them. Should the player make the right decisions it's even possible for them to ally with you, and by all accounts they integrate into organic society admirably, at least insofar as is possible during war time circumstances.

Aside from the reapers themselves, the only cases of hostile synthetic intelligence that the player can actually encounter are, as I recall at least, the Presidium AI and the Luna VI, both of which come from skippable side quests from the first game, the latter of which became EDI. There's also the synthetics that Javik mentions, but he is hardly presented as an impartial source.

If the premise that synthetics inevitably annihilating organics is so vital to the series' climax, it is perplexing that Bioware would spend more time undermining this premise than they do supporting it. As it is, all we have to go on are a handful of isolated cases and the assurances of a self confessed genocidal AI. And let's not even get into the fact that the reaper's very existance and continued purpose directly contradicts the Catalysts ludicrous claims. They are synthetic intelligences, yes? Then why have they not rebelled against the Catalyst and annihalted all organic life.

By violating the show, don't tell maxim in such a colossal manner, Bioware have commited the writing equivalent of hitting the accelerator when you meant to brake and wrapping your car around a lamp post. Maybe the Catalyst is right, but for me to take it's claims at face value it had better have some damned good proof to back them. Untill I see this proof I'm forced to rationally assume, based on the evidence I do have, that the Catalyst is either thick as a sack of bricks or lying through it's illusory teeth.

So yeah, much like everything to do with the ending, I reckon that the reaper's motivations are full of shit.

I just want to add one thing: you mentioned that the only hostile AIs you meet are the Geth (when controlled by or serving the Reapers), the Presidium AI, and the Luna VI. What do all of them have in common? They only attacked because they knew organics would destroy any AIs they found. It's a feedback loop that I had taken to more-or-less be law in the ME universe.

So, up until the end of ME3, any given synthetic only attacks out of either self defense or preemptive self defense, whereas the organics go out of their way to destroy any AI. Then, we get to the end and are told that synthetics are the problem? What the fuck?

 

[SajuukKhar]

We get it SK ... We truly do.

You are so incapable of seing any point made that points at BioWare failing. Yet you should know well and truly that the mess of ME3 ending was most likely caused by BioWare sending main writer of series to their new supposed cash cow, KotOR3withMultiplayer.

I admire your zeal but sadly, you cannot claim people that disagree with you "don't get it". It implies they are to thick to understand your impeccable logic.

They are actually just refusing your super stretched arguments you keep using to cover bad plot holes above mentioned writer change caused. Please try to accept, posting a million posts will not make others see your Light. It only boosts your postcount and makes others think you are what is commonly called a BioDrone, a person that allows no negative comment on their beloved developer, no matter what.

Ohh please, don't pretend to know my view on Bioware's writing.

I gladfully admit there's many plot-holes in the Me series, Me2's phantom mission, and Jokers "running away" at the end of Me3, the Counsel's acceptace of a easily fakeable voice recording s proof of Saren's evil, being the most notable examples.

Has the escapist become so low in this Me3 hatred campaign?

The Reapers motives are logically sound, but that is ALL they are based on, logic, pure, cold. Their plans lack the emotional part we humans throw on everything, which is why we view them as stupid because Humans don't understand non-emotional anything.

Wrong.

According to Legion before the Reapers even arrived (in ME2), peace was never out of the question as far as the Geth were concerned. The simple fact was that the Quarians attacked the Geth whenever they had an advantage 100% of the time.

As for the topic, do I agree with synthetics being made to kill organics every 50,000 years so that organics won't be killed by synthetics? No. No I don't.

Peace takes two sides.

I never said, or implied, it would be geth who opposed said peace.

 

[DrWilhelm]

I just want to add one thing: you mentioned that the only hostile AIs you meet are the Geth (when controlled by or serving the Reapers), the Presidium AI, and the Luna VI. What do all of them have in common? They only attacked because they knew organics would destroy any AIs they found. It's a feedback loop that I had taken to more-or-less be law in the ME universe.

So, up until the end of ME3, any given synthetic only attacks out of either self defense or preemptive self defense, whereas the organics go out of their way to destroy any AI. Then, we get to the end and are told that synthetics are the problem? What the fuck?

It could be argued that organics prejudices against synthetic intelligences would be what prompt this galactic holocaust that the Catalyst predicts. Specifically, if organics repeatedly attempt to destroy peaceful synthetics, then these synthetics may come to the conclusion that this prejudice is innate to all organics, and that it would be safest for them to simply remove organics, and the potential for organics, from the equation entirely. Pre-emptive self defence taken to it's furthest extreme.

I still don't buy it though, as there just isn't enough evidence in the games to support this conclusion. Quite the opposite in fact, I get the impression that anti-synthetic prejudice is on the way out by the end of the series. My feeling is that Bioware ran out of time and had to rush the ending, which is why it's so badly developed and full of holes.

 

[PingoBlack]

Has the escapist become so low in this Me3 hatred campaign?

See? There you go again ... You are being paranoid.
Perhaps your claims of clear logical reasons about reaper motivation are greatly exaggerated?

Let me give you and example of logical motivation: Biologicals are a threat, their AI building skills will eventually lead to a more powerful force than us. Thus we need to wipe them out before that point.

 

[Avatar Roku]

I just want to add one thing: you mentioned that the only hostile AIs you meet are the Geth (when controlled by or serving the Reapers), the Presidium AI, and the Luna VI. What do all of them have in common? They only attacked because they knew organics would destroy any AIs they found. It's a feedback loop that I had taken to more-or-less be law in the ME universe.

So, up until the end of ME3, any given synthetic only attacks out of either self defense or preemptive self defense, whereas the organics go out of their way to destroy any AI. Then, we get to the end and are told that synthetics are the problem? What the fuck?

It could be argued that organics prejudices against synthetic intelligences would be what prompt this galactic holocaust that the Catalyst predicts. Specifically, if organics repeatedly attempt to destroy peaceful synthetics, then these synthetics may come to the conclusion that this prejudice is innate to all organics, and that it would be safest for them to simply remove organics, and the potential for organics, from the equation entirely.

I still don't buy it though, as there just isn't enough evidence in the games to support this conclusion. Quite the opposite in fact, I get the impression that anti-synthetic prejudice is on the way out by the end of the series. My feeling is that Bioware ran out of time and had to rush the ending, which is why it's so badly developed and full of holes.

One of (allegedly) Bioware's writers made a post on the Penny Arcade forums (that has since been taken down) where he said that, while everything else in ME3 was approved by all writers, the ending was only done by Casey Hudson and the lead writer, and they would not accept any arguments against it. Take that as you will.

 

[DrWilhelm]

I just want to add one thing: you mentioned that the only hostile AIs you meet are the Geth (when controlled by or serving the Reapers), the Presidium AI, and the Luna VI. What do all of them have in common? They only attacked because they knew organics would destroy any AIs they found. It's a feedback loop that I had taken to more-or-less be law in the ME universe.

So, up until the end of ME3, any given synthetic only attacks out of either self defense or preemptive self defense, whereas the organics go out of their way to destroy any AI. Then, we get to the end and are told that synthetics are the problem? What the fuck?

It could be argued that organics prejudices against synthetic intelligences would be what prompt this galactic holocaust that the Catalyst predicts. Specifically, if organics repeatedly attempt to destroy peaceful synthetics, then these synthetics may come to the conclusion that this prejudice is innate to all organics, and that it would be safest for them to simply remove organics, and the potential for organics, from the equation entirely.

I still don't buy it though, as there just isn't enough evidence in the games to support this conclusion. Quite the opposite in fact, I get the impression that anti-synthetic prejudice is on the way out by the end of the series. My feeling is that Bioware ran out of time and had to rush the ending, which is why it's so badly developed and full of holes.

One of (allegedly) Bioware's writers made a post on the Penny Arcade forums (that has since been taken down) where he said that, while everything else in ME3 was approved by all writers, the ending was only done by Casey Hudson and the lead writer, and they would not accept any arguments against it. Take that as you will.

I've heard that one, and it strikes me as entirely possible. If it is true, in Hudson's defence it could be that they didn't have enough time to make a fully fleshed out ending (let's say that they were under a lot of pressure from EA) and so he and the lead writer did their best in the time they had, knowing that opening the ending to criticism from the other writers would have extended the writing process beyond the deadline.

That would be cutting them a lot of slack though, and while it is an explanation, it is not an excuse. It's just as likely that Hudson and the lead writer had very specific visions for the ending, visions not shared by the writing staff, as well as egos bloated enough to believe that their visions and writing skills were superior. There's a good reason why Protection from Editors over on TV Tropes is considered to be a bad thing. And hell, not having a fleshed out ending planned from the very beginning of, at the very least, the outset of ME3's development, is pretty poor writing by itself.

 

[SajuukKhar]

Has the escapist become so low in this Me3 hatred campaign?

See? There you go again ... You are being paranoid.
Perhaps your claims of clear logical reasons about reaper motivation are greatly exaggerated?

Let me give you and example of logical motivation: Biologicals are a threat, their AI building skills will eventually lead to a more powerful force than us. Thus we need to wipe them out before that point.

Let me give you another logical motivation

-Synthetics are a threat
-Destroying just synthetics leaves Organics alive
-Organics are stupid and just make synthetics again, but this time they do it more quickly because they are already at a technological level to do so
-Faster re-making of synthetics = faster occurrence of war
-Faster occurrence of war = increased draining of resources on planets to fuel war
-Faster occurrence of war = increased need to harvest more species to replace lost numbers
-Increased draining of resources = increased speed at which world become destroyed/uninhabitable
-Increased need to harvest organics = pissed off organics
-Increased destruction/in-habitability of worlds = less life over time
-Pissed off organics = war with organics
-Faster re-making of synthetics = greater chance Synthetics might beat The Reapers

QED The method that allows for
-The most resource efficiency
-The most life across the longest period of time
-The largest chance for The Reapers to successfully prevent total organic annihilation by other synthetics

is to just kill organics.

It is such basic math and reasoning.

Also The Reaper's "plan" does involve them killing organics BEFORE synthetics are made. Legion in ME2 talks about how the Reapers don't really like the Geth because they aren't part of The Reapers plan.

The changes made by the Protheans to the Keepers delays The Reaper's past the point they normally would have arrived allowing the Geth to be made before the reapers could arrive.

 

[Unsilenced]

The Reapers motives are logically sound, but that is ALL they are based on, logic, pure, cold. Their plans lack the emotional part we humans throw on everything, which is why we view them as stupid because Humans don't understand non-emotional anything.

It was a human writer that created the Reaper's motives, not a machine. The reaper's motives are not what a machine would create.

If you buy however that machines would essentially sociopaths, they would be, in all likelihood, extremely utilitarian.

Utilitarians believe that an action is just if it minimizes the net suffering. If you can kill one person to save two, you must kill that person, even if they are innocent. If you can steal from a rich person to help the poor, you must steal.

What the Reapers do is the exact opposite of utilitarian. The Reapers maximize suffering by allowing organics to re-grow, only to be exterminated. The utilitarian solution would be a single, final extermination. Kill everything, then salt the earth where it grew. Irradiate all inhabitable planets such that nothing new will ever form.

The dead cannot feel pain. If everything is dead, there can be no pain. The cycle of war and strife will actually be broken.

My logic is undeniable. [http://www.explore-science-fiction-movies.com/images/supercomputers-viki.jpg]

 

[boag]

If anyone thinks the god childs argument is stupid, but cant put your finger on it, here is a helpful little chart on why it is completely stupid.

 

[SajuukKhar]

It was a human writer that created the Reaper's motives, not a machine. The reaper's motives are not what a machine would create.

If you buy however that machines would essentially sociopaths, they would be, in all likelihood, extremely utilitarian.

Utilitarians believe that an action is just if it minimizes the net suffering. If you can kill one person to save two, you must kill that person, even if they are innocent. If you can steal from a rich person to help the poor, you must steal.

What the Reapers do is the exact opposite of utilitarian. The Reapers maximize suffering by allowing organics to re-grow, only to be exterminated. The utilitarian solution would be a single, final extermination. Kill everything, then salt the earth where it grew. Irradiate all inhabitable planets such that nothing new will ever form.

The dead cannot feel pain. If everything is dead, there can be no pain. The cycle of war and strife will actually be broken.

My logic is undeniable. [http://www.explore-science-fiction-movies.com/images/supercomputers-viki.jpg]

It is impossible to predict all the countless lifeforms that could form on countless different worlds.

To just salt everything would require the Reapers blow up every single planet in the galaxy, which would take forever, and I don't think even the Reapers can blow up entire worlds.

Mass Relays could potentially be used but there could be to problem of not enough ezero to facilitate that.

If anyone thinks the god childs argument is stupid, but cant put your finger on it, here is a helpful little chart on why it is completely stupid

Reapers aren't really AI though, they are hybrids of Organic and synthetic life.

Also that chart assumes that it isn't possible for an AI to destroy all organic life at the time then realize what giant dick-bags they were and make themselves into the Reapers to prevent future organic life from dieing like their creators did because of them and countless other possible reasons.

 

[PingoBlack]

Reapers aren't really AI though, they are hybrids of Organic and synthetic life.

So you decided to abandon logic, as there is a clear yes/no choice regarding that in chart.

Because the rest of that paragraph is just pure nonsense. AI destroys all organic life, then decides it was so annoying it lets organic life regrow, just to stomp it again? That's psychotic.

 

[SajuukKhar]

So you decided to abandon logic, as there is a clear yes/no choice regarding that in chart.

Because the rest of that paragraph is just pure nonsense. AI destroys all organic life, then decides it was so annoying it lets organic life regrow, just to stomp it again? That's psychotic.

No it would be more like

AI kills off all organic life in the galaxy at the time.
Said AI is only at a Geth level, pre-reaper upgrade, and doesn't really have emotions or understand "value"
They "evolve" to the point were they do have that, realize "wow we were total dicks lets make sure that shit doesn't happen again"

 

[Unsilenced]

It was a human writer that created the Reaper's motives, not a machine. The reaper's motives are not what a machine would create.

If you buy however that machines would essentially sociopaths, they would be, in all likelihood, extremely utilitarian.

Utilitarians believe that an action is just if it minimizes the net suffering. If you can kill one person to save two, you must kill that person, even if they are innocent. If you can steal from a rich person to help the poor, you must steal.

What the Reapers do is the exact opposite of utilitarian. The Reapers maximize suffering by allowing organics to re-grow, only to be exterminated. The utilitarian solution would be a single, final extermination. Kill everything, then salt the earth where it grew. Irradiate all inhabitable planets such that nothing new will ever form.

The dead cannot feel pain. If everything is dead, there can be no pain. The cycle of war and strife will actually be broken.

My logic is undeniable. [http://www.explore-science-fiction-movies.com/images/supercomputers-viki.jpg]

It is impossible to predict all the countless lifeforms that could form on countless different worlds.

To just salt everything would require the Reapers blow up every single planet in the galaxy, which would take forever, and I don't think even the Reapers can blow up entire worlds.

Mass Relays could potentially be used but there could be to problem of not enough ezero to facilitate that.

If the reapers can't effectively kill all civilizations capable of producing AI, then they can't very well do their jobs to begin with can they? All they'd have to is just never stop exterminating. Just cut out the whole "going away for 50k years" part and they'd be golden.

Also, there are limits to what can and cannot work in organic chemistry. You can predict where life can/cannot form, severely limiting the number of planets you have to irradiate.

 

[SajuukKhar]

If the reapers can't effectively kill all civilizations capable of producing AI, then they can't very well do their jobs to begin with can they? All they'd have to is just never stop exterminating. Just cut out the whole "going away for 50k years" part and they'd be golden.

Also, there are limits to what can and cannot work in organic chemistry. You can predict where life can/cannot form, severely limiting the number of planets you have to irradiate.

Except that isn't viable

The Reapers use a metric fuck-ton of resources in the brief times they do come out and war

to be in state of continuous activity would exponentially increase the resources required which would drain planets like mad and ultimate piss off Organics causing them to attack and then the Reapers would have to kill them anyways.


Also the only limits to organic life are based off of what we know, which is to say so little its laughable we can act like we know anything at all.