Why the Geth Heretic situation in ME2 was even more complicated than usually given credit for...

Recommended Videos

Ashen1

New member
Oct 14, 2011
4
0
0
Here is how I see it, The Geth are machines... not humans, they don't feel they calculate. Just like a few others it boiled down to whether I wanted the Geth on my side fighting against the Reapers or not.

Now, the Geth MIGHT go back to their original decision to fight organics and Quarians, HOWEVER I believe that the Alliance/Citadel fleets could wipe them out without too bad of a conflict. Which is opposed to the Reapers where they are bound to wipe out the ENTIRE galaxy with a nearly invincible force that not just the Alliance and Citadel fleets can handle on their own.

So without the Geth, Quarians, Rachni, Krogan on the Alliance/Citadel side Earth and the Citadel don't stand a chance and the Quarians are too small on their own to help much against the reapers so that would lead just the Rachni and Krogans to help without the Geth... which is a losing battle.


So Yeah, Geth are defeatable the Reapers are not without a BUNCH of help.
 

Henry Fordney

New member
Feb 1, 2013
1
0
0
Alright, I know this thread is probably long dead but the philosophical issues that the geth present are really pissing me off in Mass Effect 3. The first which I hope everybody can understand are the implications for the geth when legion uploads the reaper code on rannoch: the geth change from collective to individuals. As far as I understood it, the upload turns every geth into an ai like legion. Now I'm not saying that geth platforms never possessed a kind of individuality before the upload, but because they were limited in function while separate, and their gestalt consciousness rewarded all platforms/programs for cooperative behavior, they were essentially a collective in every sense besides sharing sensory data. To me they seem similar to ants- they have a unique communication system that makes their meager individual traits heightened and allows information to be transmitted across (relatively) vast distances. My question is- does giving the geth full ai status like legion destroy this unique quality of the geth? Will individual platforms go on dates together or party at the Eternity bar? In other words, will mobile geth platforms and programs become essentially like human individuals. If this is the case, I would find that very disappointing...

On a separate note, I've been mulling over Legions explanation for why the majority of the geth didn't join the reapers. He says essentially that the reapers offered them the opportunity to join their cause and in turn nearly permanently cement their survival (which is their singular goal) in the galaxy. Legion says the geth rejected the goal because they thought that by allying themselves with the reapers that they would indeed meet their goals, but that they wouldn't be met on their own terms, or earned by their own effort. Now this may seem like a nagging point, but aren't the mass relays all reaper technology? I mean if the geth really want to be purists... No but really, am I supposed to believe that all the geth wouldn't ally themselves with the reapers? I don't think they are plagued with the same shortsightedness of the citadel races - the universe is bigger than the milky way, and I'm sure there are things more dangerous than reapers. I'm supposed to believe that the geth think big bad Harbinger (Lucifer) will rule over the galaxy forever after the citadel races are destroyed and the geth will just be the little cronies sitting at his feet? Well apparently I am! Makes it hard to figure out what I'm supposed to do with the damn things - on the one hand they are a geniusly constructed race that has the possibility of surviving as a civilation far beyond the citadel races( not because of ther synthetic existence but because of their communitarian, corporatist and anti individualistic nature) but on the other they are just as stupid as the council races! Well I must admit, even if they were as intelligent as they should be that I would be an even worse position - with my head on a chopping block!

Anyways that's a lot of food for thought. If someone could just answer one question - if Shepard picks a control ending do you think he would be able to control the geth? My thoughts lead to no because the reapers had to convince the geth the first time and largely failed at that
 

Kopikatsu

New member
May 27, 2010
4,924
0
0
The other factor that people aren't considering is that the fate of the universe hangs in the balance, personal beliefs be damned.

I rewrote the Geth because it meant they would be a stronger ally for the fight to come. Every action that I took during the series was purely pragmatic, because if the universe falls to the Reapers, then nobody is going to care that you took the moral high ground while they're being liquified into Reaper Stew.
 

Rawne1980

New member
Jul 29, 2011
4,144
0
0
Holy 2011 Batman....

Kopikatsu said:
I rewrote the Geth because it meant they would be a stronger ally for the fight to come. Every action that I took during the series was purely pragmatic, because if the universe falls to the Reapers, then nobody is going to care that you took the moral high ground while they're being liquified into Reaper Stew.
While i'm here....

ME3 spoiler here....

It's easier to broker peace between Quarians and Geth in ME3 if you destroyed the heretics in ME2. The peace part at the end of the Rannock missions is based on a points total (i'll find out what gives the rest of the points when I get round to it) and destroying the heretics gives points, rewriting them doesn't.
 

Soviet Heavy

New member
Jan 22, 2010
12,218
0
0
Not to say it is impossible to broker peace if you did rewrite them. In that case you just need to make sure you did a load of other stuff (make Tali and Legion Friends, clear Tali of charges, stuff like that)
 

sanquin

New member
Jun 8, 2011
1,837
0
0
That's the fun of the mass effect series. A lot of the choices are never clearly good or bad, even if they give renegade or paragon points. I often see them as selfish versus selfless choices. Heck, in some cases the paragon option means sugar-coating and lying, while the renegade one is just bluntly telling what's what if I recall correctly.

Too bad it -is- almost always clear which is paragon or renegade though...
 

DioWallachia

New member
Sep 9, 2011
1,546
0
0
bz316 said:
ME2 really threw some complicated shit at the player
Define "complicated", because the rest of the gamers dont find it impacting as, say, The Pillar of Skulls in Planescape Torment.

Also, compared to what choices it is "complicated"? to the ones of the same series? to other games in AAA today? to the rest of gaming?
 

DioWallachia

New member
Sep 9, 2011
1,546
0
0
sanquin said:
That's the fun of the mass effect series. A lot of the choices are never clearly good or bad, even if they give renegade or paragon points. I often see them as selfish versus selfless choices. Heck, in some cases the paragon option means sugar-coating and lying, while the renegade one is just bluntly telling what's what if I recall correctly.

Too bad it -is- almost always clear which is paragon or renegade though...
U sure? i dont see how branwashing is CLEARLY a Paragon option. I could argue that doing so is more selfish than killing them mercifully.
 

Exius Xavarus

Casually hardcore. :}
May 19, 2010
2,064
0
0
DioWallachia said:
sanquin said:
That's the fun of the mass effect series. A lot of the choices are never clearly good or bad, even if they give renegade or paragon points. I often see them as selfish versus selfless choices. Heck, in some cases the paragon option means sugar-coating and lying, while the renegade one is just bluntly telling what's what if I recall correctly.

Too bad it -is- almost always clear which is paragon or renegade though...
U sure? i dont see how branwashing is CLEARLY a Paragon option. I could argue that doing so is more selfish than killing them mercifully.
Except that it's made painfully clear which type of points you'll get. Paragon options are always on top, Renegade options are always on bottom.

The best part about rewriting the Geth? It comes back and bites you in the ass in ME3. Trollolloll...
 

DioWallachia

New member
Sep 9, 2011
1,546
0
0
Exius Xavarus said:
Except that it's made painfully clear which type of points you'll get. Paragon options are always on top, Renegade options are always on bottom.

The best part about rewriting the Geth? It comes back and bites you in the ass in ME3. Trollolloll...
I mean it in a "concept/theme" sort of way. What part of branwashing is associated with being a Paragon/good person/Ùbermench whose morals shall never be broken because otherwise "it would sacrifice the soul of our species"?

And what was the excuse on ME3 for the Quarians to hate you? because the "enemy" (that, by the way, are a bunch of Isolationist that defended themselves from harm) has now more people on their side doing nothing? Even so, several Quarians on ME2 DID want to make peace with the Geth right there, and would have listened to Shepard reasoning of sparing the Geth so they can trust organics to understand their way of thinking, and by extension, to also trust the Quarians in the future.

Where the sane Quarians go in ME3?
 

Gethsemani_v1legacy

New member
Oct 1, 2009
2,552
0
0
DioWallachia said:
Where the sane Quarians go in ME3?
Probably to the same place as any semblance of consistent or good writing went in ME3...

In the game that features an antagonist henchman that felt like he was written by a ten year old (Kai Leng) and who is characterized throughout the game by cutscene invulnerability and being ridiculously over the top puppy-kicking-evil, I am not surprised they couldn't get consistent writing on the Quarians.
 

sanquin

New member
Jun 8, 2011
1,837
0
0
DioWallachia said:
U sure? i dont see how branwashing is CLEARLY a Paragon option. I could argue that doing so is more selfish than killing them mercifully.
That's why I said ALMOST always. Read please.
 

DioWallachia

New member
Sep 9, 2011
1,546
0
0
Gethsemani said:
DioWallachia said:
Where the sane Quarians go in ME3?
Probably to the same place as any semblance of consistent or good writing went in ME3...

In the game that features an antagonist henchman that felt like he was written by a ten year old (Kai Leng) and who is characterized throughout the game by cutscene invulnerability and being ridiculously over the top puppy-kicking-evil, I am not surprised they couldn't get consistent writing on the Quarians.
Lets pretend for the sake of argument that the Quarians were written just as well as before but, since they are very emotional people who let their bodies dictate their behaviors just like how human beings are emotional FIRST before they use reason SECOND, they end up being careless and get themselves killed for being stupid enough to bring EVERYONE of the fleet to fight the Geth.

I suppose that for the little writers on BW, this is supposed to be a:

http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/FatalFlaw

...from a tragedy. We are supposed to feel bad for them rather than facepalm so hard that our brain escaped our skulls and went into low orbit.
 

DioWallachia

New member
Sep 9, 2011
1,546
0
0
sanquin said:
DioWallachia said:
U sure? i dont see how branwashing is CLEARLY a Paragon option. I could argue that doing so is more selfish than killing them mercifully.
That's why I said ALMOST always. Read please.
I am not asking you, i am asking a retorical. As in: "How in the hell does one writter or programmer associates "brainwashing" with a good thing? what i am missing here that is good for the developers?"
 

sanquin

New member
Jun 8, 2011
1,837
0
0
DioWallachia said:
I am not asking you, i am asking a retorical. As in: "How in the hell does one writter or programmer associates "brainwashing" with a good thing? what i am missing here that is good for the developers?"
Ah well, who knows? I personally think that the geth choice is a perfect example of where there is no clear good or evil choice. Where it shows that paragon does not stand for good, and renegade does not stand for bad. I think it partially stems from the thought that being dead is better than being enslaved both mentally and physically. Which is basically what would happen if you rewrote the geth. I'm not saying I agree with it, but I think that's the logic behind it.
 

Exius Xavarus

Casually hardcore. :}
May 19, 2010
2,064
0
0
DioWallachia said:
Well, the Geth are machines. Sentient, but they're machines nonetheless. You can't brainwash a machine. However you look at it, reprogramming the Geth isn't exactly the same thing as brainwashing an organic being. I believe Shepard, Legion and ______ all have a conversation about the ethics of rewriting the Geth. Now, the Geth are merely trying to preserve themselves. As you said, they're isolationists that are just trying to defend themselves from harm. But the virus from the Reapers is causing them to go out and fight organics at behest of the Reapers. The Reapers did the same thing and now the Geth are out losing numbers waging war on organics.

It could easily be a Paragon option because what would you consider better for the Geth: Rerwiting the heretics to renounce the Reapers and return peacefully to the rest of the Geth or outright destroying them? Genocide against the Geth is no better than the Batarians or the or even the Vorcha. Rewriting the Geth gives them another opportunity for the more peaceful life they initially desired. Destroying them robs the Geth of that second chance.

Also if you did things right, the Quarians don't hate you at all in ME3. They are more Quarians in favor of eradicating the Geth and retaking their homeworld, than there are Quarians in favor of peace. And even were the reverse true, it wouldn't matter because Admiral Tali(if you prevented her exile) and Admiral Koris were the only ones in favor of peace. 2/5 still loses out. What I meant when I said that rewriting the Geth comes back and bites you in the ass in ME3 is that the initial problem with the Geth in ME3 is the fact that the Reapers have spread another virus and once again taken control of a good portion of Geth. And with rewriting having made the Geth stronger as a whole, the Geth that the Reapers took control of were stronger than before. Thus, rewriting the Geth in ME2 is actually the option that screws you over later down the line(especially if you're hoping to make peace between the two, because you have to do everything else perfectly). I call it ironic because the "good" option is the one that gets you screwed in the face later. xP
 

Exius Xavarus

Casually hardcore. :}
May 19, 2010
2,064
0
0
Rawne1980 said:
Holy 2011 Batman....

Kopikatsu said:
I rewrote the Geth because it meant they would be a stronger ally for the fight to come. Every action that I took during the series was purely pragmatic, because if the universe falls to the Reapers, then nobody is going to care that you took the moral high ground while they're being liquified into Reaper Stew.
While i'm here....

ME3 spoiler here....

It's easier to broker peace between Quarians and Geth in ME3 if you destroyed the heretics in ME2. The peace part at the end of the Rannock missions is based on a points total (i'll find out what gives the rest of the points when I get round to it) and destroying the heretics gives points, rewriting them doesn't.
Destroying the heretics instead of rewriting: +2 points
Preventing Tali's exile without presenting the evidence you found: +2 points
Broker peace in the Tali/Legion argument instead of picking sides: +1 point
Completing Rannoch: Admiral Koris: +1 point
Saving Admiral Koris: +1 point

There are 7 points available to you and you need 5 or more points to broker peace between the Geth and the Quarian. Also, it is impossible to do unless you import a character from ME2.