Talk:Reaper

Vandalism
I think someone has been vandalising this page...


 * Don't worry it's fixed. Bioevil087  14:11, 24 November 2007 (UTC)

Unsorted theory threads
Does it seem like the first portion of this article, before the spoiler warning, is a bit over dramatic? It does not seem to fit with the rest of the wiki, in that it provides information that seems assumed, rather than backed up by knowledge from the game. I cite especially where the editor(s) speak about the funding and work hours spent to find out about the reapers, highlighted right after explaining that there were very few who were interested... my point being, is all this information accurate, and is it currently presented in the most clean and (video game based) factual way possible? Just curious for input. Also, it should at the very least be moved to the section after that spoiler tag.

Everything's after the tag, now, and I've rewritten the most flagrant bits of melodrama. Also, it seems like the concept of indoctrination should have its own section, at least-possibly an article.

Is it correct to refer to the Reapers as AI, if they were not created by anyone? AI has a creator. --84.69.214.28 22:27, 5 January 2008 (UTC)


 * The salarian councillor describes Sovereign as an AI. Sovereign claimed no one created the Reapers, but it also claimed to be invincible. If the Reapers are machines, they had to be built by somebody originally, and I'm guessing they either don't want to remember that, or don't want to admit it to organic races. -- Tullis 23:08, 5 January 2008 (UTC)


 * ::Point taken, it would be interesting if it was found out that the machines have no creator, I think this is a grey area deliberately created by the writers to avoid awkward questions, paradoxes and the sort.


 * It's also logically impossible. Molecules really can't fall together and become self determining robots made from liquifed sentient beings by chance, it's different for organic life because that's fundamentally a set of complex chemical reactions but natural processes simply can't program. Given that Reapers have been around for least 37 million years ago (you visit a reaper disabled that long ago in the second game), and Liara thinks that someone (the Reapers) have been removing evidence of previous civilisation I think it's simply because only the Reapers actually know at this point who invented this and they're not telling anyone. Steviesteveo 22:18, January 31, 2010 (UTC)
 * It's also logically impossible. Molecules really can't fall together and become self determining robots made from liquifed sentient beings by chance, it's different for organic life because that's fundamentally a set of complex chemical reactions but natural processes simply can't program. Given that Reapers have been around for least 37 million years ago (you visit a reaper disabled that long ago in the second game), and Liara thinks that someone (the Reapers) have been removing evidence of previous civilisation I think it's simply because only the Reapers actually know at this point who invented this and they're not telling anyone. Steviesteveo 22:18, January 31, 2010 (UTC)


 * Of course, that is predicated upon the assumption that the original Reapers were "self determining robots made from liquified sentient beings" when this is never stated. We know that now, apparently, the Reapers can "reproduce" by liquifying sentient beings to make new Reapers, but this in no way, shape, or form means that the original Reapers came about through the same process. In fact, at this time I see no reason to assume so based on the uniformity of the other Reapers seen. Every Reaper shown other than the Human-Reaper looks pretty much the same, like a giant cuttlefish. Knowing what we know about the liquification process of building a Reaper, this would have taken, what, a few trillion trillion sentients to accomplish? And you have to remember that we're told the Reaper takes the physical form of the beings it's made of, so all these sentients would have to be of the same or very similar races. It doesn't make sense to assume that the Reapers have always used this method to increase their numbers. SpartHawg948 22:24, January 31, 2010 (UTC)


 * It's also possible, due to the size disparity between the Human-Reaper and all other Reapers seen during the ending cutscene of ME2, that perhaps only an inner portion of the Reaper that is not visible to outsiders, and perhaps not even displayed to indoctrinated servants within the Reaper (such as Saren or Benezia) takes on the form of the species whose genetic material is used to form a new Reaper. With that consiideration in mind, it is entirely possibly that an extremely advanced civilization existing a huge amount of time before even the Protheans were faced with a catastrophy on a galactic scale and were forced to build a Reaper out of their own genetic material in hopes that the Reaper may eventually use that genetic material to "jump start" evolution and regrow their race anew, but somewhere along the way the Reaper made plans of its own and each Reaper is the result of the harvesting of genetic material from suitable races to form a Reaper Larva which is then contained within the standard, minimally variated Reaper hulls that are seen at the endgame cutscene. Remember, I beleive EDI states that the Reapers attempted to make a Prothean-Reaper, but failed, speculated that they likely failed to to the Protheans relatively successful attempts to thwart the Reapers. Elseagoat 17:39, February 23, 2010 (UTC)
 * It's also possible, due to the size disparity between the Human-Reaper and all other Reapers seen during the ending cutscene of ME2, that perhaps only an inner portion of the Reaper that is not visible to outsiders, and perhaps not even displayed to indoctrinated servants within the Reaper (such as Saren or Benezia) takes on the form of the species whose genetic material is used to form a new Reaper. With that consiideration in mind, it is entirely possibly that an extremely advanced civilization existing a huge amount of time before even the Protheans were faced with a catastrophy on a galactic scale and were forced to build a Reaper out of their own genetic material in hopes that the Reaper may eventually use that genetic material to "jump start" evolution and regrow their race anew, but somewhere along the way the Reaper made plans of its own and each Reaper is the result of the harvesting of genetic material from suitable races to form a Reaper Larva which is then contained within the standard, minimally variated Reaper hulls that are seen at the endgame cutscene. Remember, I beleive EDI states that the Reapers attempted to make a Prothean-Reaper, but failed, speculated that they likely failed to to the Protheans relatively successful attempts to thwart the Reapers. Elseagoat 17:39, February 23, 2010 (UTC)

Speculation Moved from main article:

It should also be noted that the Reapers may not just be a race of vessel machines as we are led to believe. In the vision that Commander Shepard experienced from the Prothean Beacon there were glimpses of what looked like half machine, half organic beings harvesting the Protheans. You also catch a glimpse of one these beings mouths screaming in the vision. This would also explain why Sovereign actually has an interior and the infrastructure to carry passengers. If they were merely a race of synthetic vessels they would have no need to have the ability to transport organics, unless it is to disperse their indoctrinated slaves across the galaxy. What is also seen in this vision is what looks to be synthetic matter "growing" onto an organic surface. This hints that the dragon's teeth are in fact Reaper technology that turns organic material to synthetic, and it could hint at one of two things or both: the harvesting processes might include turning the advanced species of the galaxy to artificial life and enslaving them, or that new Reapers are "grown" out of the harvested races. If the mecha-organic Reaper theory is used, it can be postulated that, given the "billion year old genetically-engineered starship" (the 'leviathan of Dis') found on Jartar, the Reapers have existed in their present state for at least a billion years.


 * if know one created the reapers maybe they are like a galatic god of some sort?-electrobolt


 * They want you to believe they were not created and that they are invincible. However at the end of the game it is proved that they are not invincible, and so I have my doubts regarding the fact that they are "eternal" and that they have no creator. ;) We will see in the sequel. Darkdrium 03:37, 25 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Agreed. They're machines. They have to have been built by someone-a machine can't simply evolve. Sovereign was probably just playing psychological warfare games-he seems to think very poorly of organics, and might think we'd buy that.Freemanhasaposse 03:44, 25 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Okay, I've seen this mistake made several times. Just because humans are organic doesn't exempt them from the classification of 'machine' all organic species are machines, they're just made of carbon and water instead of steel and silicon. There's some speculation that life might be able to form based around silicon instead of carbon under certain circumstances and perhaps they'd call themselves something else because they aren't based around carbon, which is the definition of organic. If a species evolved that way, with a different base chemistry, they could say they had no creator, as they evolved the same way any other species did. Or, perhaps they were the normal sort of organic species who augmented themselves to an extent where they started to be more synthetic than natural and still have no creator since they evolved as any other species, but then elevated themselves to something more than purely organic. This could easily explain their attitude towards organics, believing they transcended organic life, and so are superior to them. Also, in not being synthetic in the usual sense, they could have a bias against synthetic life because they're just a product of organics, maybe seen as cowardice for the organics, not willing to elevate themselves or something of that nature. But really my point was that humans are machines, just less robust than others. Greatak 19:20, February 23, 2010 (UTC)

Speaking of speculation, what about that bit at the end of the first section about reverse-engineering of mass relays possibly being the trigger for the Reaper's return? I don't think there is enough substantial proof for this to be included. The dialogue of the game suggests that Sovereign has been trying to activate the Citadel relay for some time by the time Shepard becomes involved, and the Citadel races appear to have no idea of how to reverse engineer a relay. Maybe that line should go until there is more conclusive evidence. SpartHawg948 17:51, 13 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Also, (just thought of this) how would the Reapers know about the reverse engineered relay? They had no knowledge of Ilos, as Vigil clearly states, because the Protheans wisely kept Ilos "of the grid" (ie no records or data on file, extremely compartmentalized, need-to-know, etc..) It's obvious that sometime later Sovereign (or Saren) learned about the relay, but it also seems obvious to me that the Reapers would have had no knowledge of the relay before they attacked. SpartHawg948 17:55, 13 September 2008 (UTC)
 * I know this is an 18 month old thread, but I wanted to make a note. Sovereign and/or the Reapers probably were aware of the Conduit, for two reasons:
 * The location of the research and the origin relay (that is, Ilos) may have been classified, but that doesn't mean the project itself was completely secret. Records of the project, such as a name and possibly a basic purpose probably existed, in a manner similar to U.S. defense spending allocations; the name of the project and the (general) purpose (e.g. build a stealth fighter) are public knowledge, while the details are hidden. If we give the Reapers a small amount of luck (to have at least one appropriations bill survive their attack) and any credit for brains, they'd have known of the research.
 * More importantly, the Relay Monument on the Citadel is a dead giveaway. Modern species may think it's just a statue, because they don't understand the relays and the keepers remove the need to explore and reverse engineer the Citadel, but the Reapers would presumably recognize a relay terminal in the heart of their trap.
 * Simply knowing of it doesn't mean they'd do anything about it though. As long as Ilos itself was unknown (reasonable, since it is stated that you can't know the destination of a Mass Relay without using it, so backtracking from the Relay Monument is out), they'd simply assume their purge would clear up any loose ends. After all, they're killing the whole species anyway, so what does one dinky relay research project matter? They may be a bit overconfident, but they've got justification: Taking the 37 million year old derelict as the lower bound on their age, with an average time between reaping of 50,000 years, they've pulled this off at least 740 times without a hitch. How were they to know the Protheans would not only build a relay prototype, but hide it successfully, and build it well enough to remain operational for another 50,000 years? A more logical explanation is that they knew of the Conduit (along with all the other data they copied off the Protheans' networks before destroying them) but it didn't become important until Sovereign tried to initiate a new purge and the keepers didn't work. Only then did they comb through the archives, look for anything that might help, and start a hundreds of years long process to acquire agents and look for ways to solve the problem. The Conduit was likely just one of many options explored; the decision to focus on it presumably dates to within months of the attack on Eden Prime. ShadowRanger 18:18, February 25, 2010 (UTC)

I think it's obvious that the reapers where inspired by the saberhagen bezerkers. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Berserker_(Saberhagen)


 * Entirely possible, and there are a number of similarities, though there are a number of sources for a conflict between organic and synthetic intelligences. That said, your link points out a second likely borrowing: The anti-Berserker Berserker was named the qwib-qwib. I'm sure someone thought naming a ship in the Quarian Flotilla the Qwib-qwib would be a nice tip of the hat, plus an opportunity to make for some hilarious dialog in Tali's loyalty quest. ShadowRanger 18:24, February 25, 2010 (UTC)

I personaly believe that the droid things in the pre E3 trailer were Reapers. Drsdino 04:55, 28 May 2009 (UTC)

Who’s to say that machines can't evolve? There is much in common with robots and organic life. Wires are simply metal nerves, the creatures could have metal skin, and the creatures could use something similar to the geth’s synthetic rubber muscle. The turains already have a metal faceplate growing on their head and the synthetic muscle has already been developed in the real world. On a faraway bizarre world in another galaxy these sorts of creatures could evolve. All that makes us organic is our carbon base but what if a species is, say, titanium based? These creatures would look very robotic. After all, all we are is a cloud of atoms animated by chemical reactions, is that so much different than a robot? By the way, I think that the reapers are a human sized species too, and that sovereign was simply starship shaped because the races of the galaxy would take notice if they saw the reapers in their true form running around the stars. Well that’s my theory; say what you like about it.

''Sorry to interject in the middle of your theory, but I would like to point out that evolution requires some very key components in order to occur. First, there must be genetic variation, when a new member of the population is created, there must be some degree of randomness where the individual may develope unique traits. Second, there must be enough pressure from the environment to ensure that the population is strained, so that "survival of the fittest" applies (this is why the Krogan are very genetically stable and do not evolve, they are not pressured by many habitable environments other than the extremely hostile Tuchunka, their homeworld.) Third, it is assumed that the most fit individuals will reproduce, passing on their unique genes. Since machines are manufatured and have no genetic variation, they cannot evolve in the standard manner. The closest to evolution that a synthetic could come to would be self determinated. The machine could decide for itself how to be more efficient or effective and make the changes that it sees fit, but this would be a synthetic equivalent of evolution.Elseagoat 17:39, February 23, 2010 (UTC)''


 * Sorry to interject on your interjection but genetic variation originally was replication being performed imperfectly. They were trying to make identical copies of themselves, but little hiccups occurred, over time eventually ending up with the sexual reproduction system that most organisms evolve with now. If there's just machines making more machines, they're not perfect. The purpose of quality control departments in manufacturing plants is to make sure that the deviations from the intended design aren't too severe as to limit the effectiveness of the part, but as long as it still works, that part is still used. So what if there were only geth, making more geth. There's plenty of individual parts that could be made in a less than perfect manner that, in effect, is extremely similar to point mutations in genetic code. With sufficient time, these mutations could develop into some sort of analogous mechanism to sexual reproduction to encourage more rapid evolution, or even something akin to in vivo modification, such as the genetic enhancements referenced throughout the ME universe. And as production facilities expand, using a single master copy of their programming becomes more an more unfeasible and as you start making copies of copies, things like compression artifacts could build up and drive evolution in their software as well as hardware. Evolution could work just fine in synthetic life, not to mention driven evolution of them identifying flaws in their design and improving it. Each platform would have different needs and so optimize itself differently. Greatak 19:32, February 23, 2010 (UTC)

I've got a theory thats particularly interesting but requires some knowledge in quantum physics and some creativity to understand. I believe that the Reapers were originally energy beings that existed in the chaotic aftermath of the Big Bang. In the 300,000 years it took for the Universe to cool down, they learned all about they the Universe can and does work, as energy beings should last forever (so long as the circumstances remain constant). However, as the Universe cooled and matter and energy decoupled (in the early Universe, matter and energy were the same, and existed as one, allowing energy beings to exist, but when it cooled down, energy seperated fom matter), energy beings couldn't exist, so they pulled together warship bodies of "Reaper alloy", becoming the Reapers we know and hate (or love, depending on who you are). The reason they destroy organic life is either one of the following:

1. They're really ticked that we evolved when they couldn't, and add insult to injury by destroying us at our apex

or (As I believe)

2.They aren't really "destroying" or "killing" as much as "cleansing". I am addressing the "synthetic material growing on organic material". This might actually be the Reapers "cleansing" the Protheans, turning them into geth-like beings, so that they can (as a Reaper would say)"progress to absolute perfection, as we have". This would explain the prupose and origins of the Dragon's Teeth: To "purify" organics.

Thats my theroy, point out any flaws I may have.


 * Ok, a few thoughts:


 * 1) If they are energy beings, why would it matter if energy and matter began seperating b/c the universe cooled? They're energy beings, after all, not energy and matter beings (if I am understanding you correctly).
 * 2) If they were unable to exist in their prior state b/c of this cooling, how would cobbling together starship hull bodies help them in the least bit? Wouldn't they still be energy beings inside starship hulls? Energy beings still susceptible to the cooling that was threatening them from the get-go?
 * 3) They state that they aim to bring about the extinction of their targets. Pretty straightforward, that part. Extinction.
 * 4) From what we've seen, based on the statements of Sovereign, the Reapers feel nothing but contempt for organic beings, and for that matter, they feel pretty much the same way about the geth (viewing them as nothing but tools to be discarded when their usefulness is at an end). You generally don't elevate those you hold in contempt to anywhere near your level by helping them "progress to absolute perfection".
 * Those are my basic thoughts regarding potential flaws. Also as an aside, I don't see anything in there that requires any real knowledge in quantum mechanics (as quantum physics is more properly known). I have no real knowledge of it other than that obtained in passing, mostly from SciFi, and I think I followed the theory pretty well. Also, please remember to sign your edit, which can be done by using four tildes (this guy ~) SpartHawg948 12:32, October 27, 2009 (UTC)

This is where the quantum mechanics comes in: In order for a normal being to exist, it must exist as matter, taking up space. The reason for this being that if a being is not matter, they are just random energy flucuations, incapable of thought. If matter and energy are one, as in a young universe, then energy beings can exist. As the universe cooled, The Reapers put together bodies of thier choice, like creating a custom baby. This protects them in the way that they become matter, with super-complex "brains" put together for thought. A cooling universe means matter becomes predominant, meaning the reapers can only survive as matter, or synthetics, in this case. As to the contempt, I didn't say that they were doing that, only that it addressed the dragon's teeth and the images of the Protheans being "cleansed". They could just be angry because the organics thrive were they cannot. Another thought: What if the crtical level of advancement the Vanguard (Sovereign, in this case) was waiting for a level of technology that could mean the Reapers could, once again, be freed of thier physical bodies, and once again become energy. And they "purify" organics that could help them achieve this goal? And they wish the organics to progress down thier path (Citadel and mass relays) so that they are easy targets? If this is all true, the Reapers likely wait steadily longer and longer, waiting for a higher amount of advancement every time the cycle has failed. It is likely a fusion of both jealosy/fury towards the thriving organics, and a desire to be free. In the end, however, thier purpose (until we know for sure) is truly unknowable, and likely incomprehensible for the average organic. Any other points I left out? --Nra &#39;Vadumee 21:10, November 3, 2009 (UTC)


 * Please keep speculation from getting out of hand on talk pages. See the Style Guide: Talk Pages section; talk pages are ideally meant to discuss the article itself, not post exceptionally long theories. They take up too much space and make it difficult to keep track of discussions about the page. Again: we are not a forum. --Tullis 21:45, November 3, 2009 (UTC)

Based on my personal knowledge of writing stories, I can strongly say that the "Reapers" are somehow the future incarnations of the "Geth". I point towards the sentient Geth named "Legion", and the phrase the "Reaper" Vanguard (The one Reaper we were fighting in the first game) used to refer to itself, possibly meaning that it originated from "Legion". And to me it seems that the "Reaper's" cycle of death is a way to harvest parts to create more of them. In essense, they are amassing corpses and using the natural minerals and such within the bodies to create a Reaper ship. The new types of Husks can be evidence to this. How the "Reapers" being futuristic "Geth" I believe is by some sort of conclusion in the final game where they are somehow sent back in time. Though this is all speculation.


 * Based on my personal experience with... well, I don't think personal experience really factors into this at all, I'd have to say I'm skeptical of that claim. I mean, the Reapers feel nothing but contempt for the geth, as is stated more than once. The phrase "We are Legion" is of course a Biblical reference, and one that fit the Reapers to a T. The connection between this statement and the geth named Legion (please remember that, with only a couple of exceptions, race names are not capitalized) has yet to be fleshed out, but I sincerely hope it has nothing to do with a lame Star Trek style time travel cop-out. Also, if they are simply obtaining minerals to build more Reapers, why go after organics? As the codex entry on Husks states, the amount of resources recoverable from a body are minuscule, and you have to factor in the fact that each time, the yield is going to vary greatly, what with the differing numbers of and physiology of sentient life they harvest on various go-arounds. If it's about materiel, why not just strip-mine the hell out of the planets with materials they need and be done with it? Sorry, but I for one have to file that theory securely under the heading of "Highly Improbable". SpartHawg948 21:11, November 24, 2009 (UTC)

Fair Enough. Now that you mention it, that would suck if it did turn out to be the Star Trek time travel angle. 24.87.4.53

ALTHOUGH...Now after finishing my 5th playthrough of ME after I stupidly deleted my maxed out save file, I redid a quest where a bunch of Scientist find a bunch of ancient Dragon teeth or whatever the hell they're called. Those spike things that make husks. Might be something to think about... 24.87.4.53 22:38, December 1, 2009 (UTC)


 * Not gonna lie... don't see what that has to do with anything... it certainly doesn't seem to relate at all to your last post! :P I mean, it's never stated that the geth created dragon's teeth, just that they use them. They worship the Reapers, so in all likelihood they uncovered some caches of Reaper dragon's teeth and are using them themselves. SpartHawg948 23:09, December 1, 2009 (UTC)
 * O I always assumed the Geth invented the Dragon Teeth stuff. So much for my theory. 24.87.4.53 08:48, December 2, 2009 (UTC)
 * Remember Vigil? How he said that the Reapers indocrinated some of the protheans and used them to harvest the planets? Also, Saren was implanted by Sovereign, and Sovereign was able to use thes implants to control Saren. Perhaps the Reapers implanted a few of the Protheans so they could take control of their bodies and oversee the harvesting. Also, it is possible that the Reapers have the space inside for carrying indocrinated organics, and for storing the harvested technologies. Effectofthemassvariety 19:49, December 13, 2009 (UTC)

I got this bit of pure speculation from a series of cool books I've ben reading. I don't know if any of you have heard of the Fermi Paradox but a solution these books suggest is that a species would come along that sees its only way of survival as eradicating any other civilization that emerges before it becomes a threat. Maybe this is what the reapers have done and just streamlined the process with the mass relay network. The one found in the book was a giant ship and was believed to have been originally an organic mind downloaded to electronic equipment. Who knows, but I thought it was a cool idea.

Theory: We know that a) reapers are derived from the 'essence' of organic species and b) their primary goal seems to be the 'harvesting' of organic species, both for their genetic material (the collectors seemed especially interested in collecting species with unique or diverse genetics) and for their technology. We also know they may take on the appearance of the organic species they were primarily derived from, and that the majority of the Reaper fleet in dark space has the same cuttlefish-like appearance, which suggests they were all derived from one species of organics (though it's also possible all Reapers eventually take that shape, and the 'larva' resembling the source species is buried deep within that superstructure as a sort of kernel).

It seems plausible that the Reapers were once a species of biologicals who reached a technological 'singularity', developing computers and artificial intelligences that eventually outperformed organics in every way. To avoid complete irrelevance (or even extinction), as the machines would soon no longer have any use for organics, they merged their biological essence with their technology to create beings that, they hoped, would represent the next stage in their evolution, allowing them to live forever as something like gods.

Now, they have turned the galaxy into an enormous computer, iteratively producing new genetic material and technologies. The Reapers incorporate this into themselves, growing stronger as they do, and to prevent any other civilization from challenging their complete dominance they do not allow technological progress in the galaxy to proceed beyond a certain point. They no longer have any understanding of the suffering they inflict on biologicals (Harbinger's lines like 'this hurts you' and 'your form is fragile' suggest a fascination with pain- something they can no longer feel or even empathize with) and might even see the incorporation of a species' genes into one of their own as a high honor, as they are essentially turning their biological victims into gods. 98.225.37.182 22:18, February 7, 2010 (UTC)

I just finished watching pirates of the carribean 3 and I just tought of something. could the reapers be giant, snytetic, highly advanced, spacefairing Kracken?Sothourn5678 03:00, February 19, 2010 (UTC)

I've just thought of a few theorys over the time I have read these comments. Though I would like to address my most Questionable:
 * Reapers were once Organic beings. This might be possible by evidence of evolution. I mean, we've seen what happened to the Protheans after the so called "Extinction" of them through the reapers. They turned into collectors; Agents for the reapers. What if the same cycle appeared to them through some other Genocidal race. What if the Reapers were once Organic beings. We've already proved Reapers of being both Organic and Synthetic. Other evidence would be seen as how they where created. Everything/Everyone must have a creator and begining, just as everthing must have an end. Reapers are not Invincible, we all should know, we bested them all. What if the reapers were made like husks in hightened number; just as a Scion is made out of 3 organic beings. What if they are all just Evolved Husks made out of much earlier (Possibly Billions of years) civilization. Just a theory, but would still pose to be a brain-bender. FalconKilla111 05:14, February 23, 2010 (UTC)

I think they are reaping design, that is, the strategies and solutions evolved naturally in living beings bodies and cultures, for use as their own evolution. If they are near perfect beings and inmortal, that means they can´t evolve: nothing can threat them, and no death means no change.

Hey im just suffing the net and ive got an idea, the Reapers say there are salvation, well scince Organics fight ammongst them seleves a lot they may belive that we will eventully destroy ourselves and they will stop us decending into cahos in the peack of the civilistaion, then they turn into machines so some of the survivers will be not able to kill them selves further. Or they are just a bunch or stupid coputer servers who are half mad.
 * My only problem with that idea is that it doesn't explain why they went after the Protheans. The Protheans were (near as we can tell) the only major advanced race when the Reapers came through and wiped them out. There is certainly no indication of other races who warred with the Protheans anywhere near the time of their extinction at the hands of the Reapers. SpartHawg948 08:40, March 20, 2010 (UTC)

The cycle
So the Protheans disappeared 50,000 years ago, right? Pretty much all organic life was wiped out in the galaxy at that time? Would that not include early humans? How are we still around? I mean, we were just losing our hair at 200,000 years ago. We were already using tools around 75,000 years ago. Our first art appeared 50,000 years ago. Does nobody else find that little discrepancy odd? If the Reapers are so dangerous and methodical, how did they miss us? The only conclusion that I can draw is that we were not worth their time. But what about the other races? The asari discovered the Citadel when we were still evolving. That can only mean that they were at an even more advanced state of evolution 50,000 years ago. I mean, call me ignorant to the lore, but I think I see a hole in the story here. 24.5.119.163 04:48, 28 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Not all organic life was wiped out 50,000 years ago. The Reapers specifically targeted the Protheans, who were the only spacefaring species at that time. It might be that they're only interested in cultures with advanced technology; if they keep repeating the cycle, it makes sense that they'd spare primitive races without anything worth harvesting yet, and come back for them later. --Tullis 13:07, 28 May 2009 (UTC)

Its been stated by the Reapers and Protheans that all "advanced" life was targeted for whatever reason. The way they did it was that the Reapers hunted down any advanced civilizations that had contact with their technology I.E. mass relays and the citadel which made it easy to find their victims. Back 50000 years ago we were spared because the reapers would have no reason to come to us and cleanse(we were still evolving). So in the previous 50000 years the Protheans were the only advanced race. There might have been others but the Protheans were most prominent. All the races today were not a space faring civilization at the time of the prothean extiction and thus were spared. In a galaxy this big there are sure to be species that would have been spared if Soveriegn had his way because they were not in the technological criteria to be exterminated.--Majordomo50y 21:31, November 9, 2009 (UTC)
 * That's pretty much exactly what I said above. : ) --Tullis 21:33, November 9, 2009 (UTC)

Dead Reaper
I didn't see any dead reaper in the enemies dev diary... Did I miss something or did someone just get something wrong here? --84.56.115.116 15:23, November 22, 2009 (UTC)


 * I believe what is being referred to can be seen 0:45 into the clip. SpartHawg948 18:10, November 22, 2009 (UTC)

Does anyone else think that that might have been Ploba? Gigantic machinery, red background... --LBCCCP 19:22, November 27, 2009 (UTC)

New theory on Reaper cycle of extinction
It is possible that the Reapers have reached the pinnicle of their evolution and are incapable of imagination or new ideas. To this end, as all technology is based off of the mass relays and they are Reaper technology, new galactic civilisations may come up with a never before imagined technology based on this. The Reapers may incorporate this into their design during the extinction cycle, thus evolving further. -- 86.161.114.51


 * I think this idea is actually really good! I wouldn't have thought of it, but it seems to make sense. Why else would the Reapers harvest the technology of races like the Protheans? Don't the Reapers have a big chip on their... um... hulls? If organic life is so inferior, then why do they even need them. I'm speaking rhetorically, of course. There are plenty of possible explainations for the way the Reapers act, and why they do what they do. I'm just saying that this theory is very compelling, and very interesting. Effectofthemassvariety 19:38, December 13, 2009 (UTC)

Well the problem with this theory is, the Reapers put up the relays to SPECIFICALLY guarantee that any sentient race goes down a certain technological path, instead of another one that might be a weakness to them. This doesnt make any sense if the Reapers have reached the pinnacle of their technology. Wouldnt you want fresh new ideas to incorporate unto your own instead of pushing for the same thing over and over again? 24.87.4.53 14:17, December 14, 2009 (UTC)
 * Well there is the one planet race where they supposedly have a weapon against Reapers but are all dead and there is some eccentric volus who had visions trying to find it. It's all hinted at, just don't remember which planet.--Xaero Dumort 18:43, December 14, 2009 (UTC)
 * Klencory.
 * And I can't believe I knew that without looking. --Tullis 18:49, December 14, 2009 (UTC)
 * lol and I just finally found it while looking. Wonder which of us is more embarrassed.--Xaero Dumort 18:59, December 14, 2009 (UTC)
 * No, no, I think it's still me. --Tullis 19:22, December 14, 2009 (UTC)
 * If it makes you feel any better, I also thought "Klencory" as soon as I heard 'planet' and 'eccentric volus'. However, I also remembered that there is no mention of any sort of weapon against Reapers there, just "Lost crypts of beings of light". Honestly, when I read that, an offensive weapon was one of the last thoughts that entered my mind. The first, actually, based on the fact that the crypts were created to protect organics from the synthetics was that maybe it was something along the lines of a shield world like in the Halo series. So yeah, no mention of anti-Reaper "weapons", just crypts that can supposedly protect organics from "machine devils". SpartHawg948 21:20, December 14, 2009 (UTC)
 * See, I hear beings of light that were created to protect from machine devils and I think weapon. Defensive weapon, but still.--Xaero Dumort 09:01, December 15, 2009 (UTC)
 * Fair enough... seems like we're gravitating to different part of the entry. You're looking mostly at the part about beings of light "created at the dawn of time to protect organic life from synthetic 'machine devils.'" which I admit, could be construed as a weapon of some sort, while I'm looking more at the part about the crypts of the aforementioned beings of light, and crypts makes me think structures, hence defensive structures. That, and the fact that the crypts are the crypts of the beings of light is what led me more to the defensive rather than offensive theory. SpartHawg948 09:07, December 15, 2009 (UTC)

Here's a funny theory.Maybe the Reaper's way of reproduction is based on the cicle.(i don't want to spoil the game so this is the only hint i'm giving)If you don't believe me you may as well wait until the release of the game.188.27.101.111 20:56, January 24, 2010 (UTC)

Call of Cthulu/Lovecraft
Is it just me that thinks that the Reaper connection with H.P Lovecraft's Cthulu deserves more attention than a single bullet point? It just seems that the design of Sovereign itself is very much based off of Cthulu what with the tentalcle/cuttlefish face, the terrifying horror that humans can't comprehend, the consumption of lesser species, the indoctrination of humans. Just seems to warrant a little more talking about.
 * If there's a documented source for these comparisons, then sure, it warrants more attention than a single bullet point. If there isn't a source and it's speculation, than one bullet point is completely consistent with site policy. SpartHawg948 00:31, January 17, 2010 (UTC)
 * I would hesitate to label everything scary with tentacles as expressly Lovecraftian without a word of god reference to it. I think it's fairly strongly connected, the incomprehension in particular for me (Lovecraft wrote the old ones as morally neutral beings operating on a level that couldn't be expressed by human morality, only later writers made them evil - any discussion, even post ME2, about why they do the genocide at all falls into wild mass guessing or simply "I have no idea why you'd do that") Steviesteveo 07:36, February 4, 2010 (UTC)


 * What I thought of from the "dead gods may dream" line was actually the end of Neverwinter Nights 2 Mask of the Betrayer expansion. Given that it was also made by Bioware, isn't it just as likely a reference?

I'm thinking the Cthulu reference may go deeper than we realize. We now know about the Protheans being the Collectors, and therefore the Protheans' connection to the Reapers. I can't even speculate as to what this next part means, but: I just find it odd that the Protheans also have a physical resemblance to Cthulu. (Going off of statues found on Ilos in saying that.) I don't know what it means, but between the Reapers' tentacles, the Protheans' tentacles, and the "dead gods" line, something makes me scratch my head at this. On top of that, why would the attempts to create a Prothean-Reaper have failed, and does that have a connection to the above stuff? There's definitely something missing here. I don't think we're done learning about the Protheans. JakeARoonie 07:32, February 18, 2010 (UTC)

Appearance
I put a couple of sentences about the newly-raised questions of where exactly the reapers derive their appearances from. No speculation, just questions that hopefully will provoke some thought in the reader. 98.225.37.182 21:46, February 7, 2010 (UTC)

" Theoretically, should the current extinction event have come to pass, the next cycle would have seen Reapers resembling humans, salarians, turians, asari, or any number of species the Reapers felt worthy. The current Reaper fleet resembles Protheans, as they were the last species to be harvested by the Reapers."



I have a bit of a problem with this. I agree that they do take their appearance after the organics from which they form themselves, but from what we know about how the Protheans looked, the current reapers don't look anything like them. The Protheans from what we can see were bipedal, typical alien looking creatures. SPOILER That would look quite similar to the Collectors for obvious reasons. END SPOILER. Sovereign, and the other Reapers we've seen (save one exception) look like squid like creatures. Also, the events at the end of ME 2, don't prove that this is their reproductive cycle, or that they even require one. It could have been developed as a tactical advantage for the future, as Shepard was the first (in our knowledge) to prevent plan A from occurring. Nevertheless, until it is proven why they do this, it remains purely speculation and shouldn't be presented as fact on the wiki. Berychance 05:37, January 31, 2010 (UTC)


 * I agree. We're shown an image of a Prothean, you can view another Prothean vision on one of the side quests in the second game, and it doesn't look like Sovereign or Harbringer. They both appear to be the squid-like tentacled type ships. Near the end of the second game you're also shown a cut scene of a fleet of Reaper ships which are all the squid like shape. Steviesteveo 22:26, January 31, 2010 (UTC)


 * All of them looked different, they shared some similarities but there was distinctive differences, it is likely they take their appearence from the species they are built from but the only evidence for that is 1/10 of a finished reaper, the components that resemble the species they are formed from might not even be external, not enough information to be sure but there is definatly variation amongst the reapers. I do hope we see one or two in the future that have more bipedal traits. ralok 22:35, January 31, 2010 (UTC)
 * I need to see that scene again, I only watched it as part of winning the game. I would really expect to see a huge difference between different species if they're all from different ones. I'd expect to see almost nothing in common between, eg a rachni and an asari based reaper.


 * A bipedal reaper would be truly amazing to see. Sovereign is shown as being capable of landing on planetary surfaces. A bipedal reaper might presumably be able to physically walk around. Steviesteveo 22:31, February 1, 2010 (UTC)

Mind if I add a little to this discussion about Prothean - Reaper appearance issue. This is speculation.

The Reaper may be taking the most advantageous genetic traits from a single species and thus gaining a new unique form based upon many different species. The Protheans had very long tentacle fingers and beards, so far all Reapers which we have seen had this appearance. Since the Protheans were the only species to be harvested at the last cycle, the Reapers may have found bipedal form to be a disadvantage in space.

Also note that the Human-Reaper hybrid had two eye sockets but four eyes.

That way the Reapers constantly evolve by taking only the best genetic material from their former harvests and the current harvest. Also note that the lower parts of the Human-Reaper hybrid were not completed, maybe the Reapers intended on integrating an upper humanoid torso with a Reaper "squid ship". Creating a bipedal humanoid Reaper seems rather humorous.

[Sarcasm]I can already imagine a humanoid reaper trying to swim through space[/Sarcasm] Asmoderius 00:42, February 2, 2010 (UTC)

Anthropomorphism being the exception rather than the norm in previous cycles may account for the reaper fleet's apperance. Perhaps the cuttlefish-esque common thread we see has been the standard up to this point. 173.77.102.97 22:58, February 3, 2010 (UTC)

During the final mission, EDI notes that the Reapers were unable to use the Protheans to make a Reaper, and therefore repurposed them into a sort of labor force to help collect additional races to create a new reaper. As for WHY a new reaper is necessary prior to the return of the entire reaper fleet? Well, I'd assume it has something to do with the destruction of Sovereign - they clearly need some sort of vanguard to prompt their return, and his destruction represents a setback. They're then forced to alter their plan, and work through intermediaries - the Collectors - to build a new vanguard. As for why the Collectors were retained prior to Sovereign's destruction, the game notes that they were only taking limited numbers of individual races - likely as tests to determine which races would be targeted for abduction/processing vs. labor force repurposing following the reaper return. - Josh - February 2nd, 2010


 * The thought occurs that the new Reaper may actually be Sovereign's direct replacement. Resources seem to be scarce for the reapers (nothing for 50,000 years and then a sudden feast, then nothing for 50,000 years again) so they may have decided to keep their population constant. Given the advantage of surprise and the power of each individual Reaper they may not have needed to replace a Reaper in millions of years. You only actually see two reapers disabled or destroyed, one at the end of Mass Effect 1 and the other apparently 37 million years before the games. It doesn't seem to happen often, they may all look the similar because they're mostly from the same generation and are just hanging on through advantageous tactics and physical toughness Steviesteveo 07:28, February 4, 2010 (UTC)


 * This bugged me, too. Regarding appearance, the Reapers that we all see sorta look like Prothean heads - tentacle beards, and such. Remember the statues on Ilos. So it made sense that Sovereign looked like that - sounds to me like Reapers come in, harvest organics, use them to make new Reapers, and leave one behind to signal them. So a Prothean-derived Reaper stayed behind - Sovereign. I had assumed that a Human one would also be left behind for the next cycle. There are of course two problems - after the Human-Reaper went down, we see a ton of Reapers... and they're all squid-based ones. The other thing that bugs me is the scale of the Human-Reaper - it's tiny compared to any starship, let alone how big Sovereign was. So this is how I'm justifying it for now - the squid-ship is the standard for spacegoing Reapers, huge things. But they need to have more direct involvement on the ground, so they make smaller Reapers that look like the dominant species to be ground-based war machines. Also invokes terror. Imagine - Cthulhu in the sky, and a 100 meter high metal human striding towards you. Yeah, that sounds good. Hopefully however it's revealed in ME3 doesn't screw that sort of thing up. Bioware is usually quite careful with these things - they wouldn't say that Reapers all look different depending on when they were made then go and show nearly-identical Reapers a couple minutes later. [/denial] Boter 18:31, February 4, 2010 (UTC)


 * :: :::Maybe all reapers share the same general architecture. We don't actually know if the larva design is the reaper final design. It's also possible that every known Reapers are based on the same Prothean-looking species. We are told that the reapers were unable to use the protheans, maybe it's the first time they are able to product a new Reaper, maybe they failed every time except with us. Therefore it could explain that every reaper share the same appearance as they are created using the same species. Dunstark 12:02, February 8, 2010 (UTC+1)


 * What if the reapers looks like their "mother" species but then build a type of exoskeleton that is not identical but similar whit all other reapers? You must take account that EDI told that the Human Reaper was in it's larva stage, million mores (humans) were required to end it. KaTiON PT 20:44, February 10, 2010 (UTC)
 * For the exoskeleton theory to really convince me I'd have wanted to see something along those lines in the derelict reaper ship mission. The way it looked to me is that it's a single structure.


 * I really like the idea of ground based war machines, though. (I just really want a huge bipedal reaper boss, basically, I'm a gamer) Steviesteveo 20:44, February 14, 2010 (UTC)

I have a theory as to the reapers appearance. Perhaps the reapers were originally an organic race, maybe even the first, and filled the entire galaxy, in a similar way to the protheans, and because they were uninhibited by the threat of genocide, advanced to the point where they invented the reaper creation process. Because it takes so many beings to create a single reaper, it explains why all the reapers seen in-game (sans the human-reaper) look alike, and why they are so few in number. This transformation would most likely be due to a lack of resources induced by a population unrestrained by outside forces. The cycle of extinction would be their solution to having to share the resources they need to survive, and hibernation in dark space allows them to wait for resources to replenish, similar to hibernation in bears.Tantalus91 02:52, February 11, 2010 (UTC)

The exoskeleton is the exact same conclusion I came to. I formed a mental image of cracking open sovreign and finding a 100 foot tall prothean husk thing pulling the strings209.208.106.231 00:51, February 18, 2010 (UTC)

I agree with Tantalus91's statment becasue think about it, if our information is so far true about the Reapers building the Mass Relays and the Citadel, how could they have done it? If you look at the Reapers, it looks as though it would be almost impossible for them to make any of these things, due to their lack of appendages for buiding such objects. Which leads me to believe that at one time, the Reapers were in fact organic life forms that ruled over the entire galaxy. And it would be during this time that they built the Mass Relays and other objects. If this theory is in fact true, it would seem that the reason the Reapers seem to destroy other races after a time they see fit, is so they do not advance enough to learn how to turn themselves into synthetic beings, which would utimately threaten their race.--UNCxTrinity 04:29, February 23, 2010 (UTC)

Speculation
Let's please try and avoid speculation, shall we? For example, stating Reapers are at least a billion years old (if the Leviathan of Dis is a Reaper), when there is, of course, no proof that this is true. Using verifiable fact to ascertain a minimum age is fine, using assumption and speculation to ascertain it is not. And drawing a figure of 20,000 to 30,000 Reapers based on a brief snippet of video is also speculation, as is stating that the Reapers do not target other galaxies. (Note- I don't recall anything ever being said about the Reapers only targeting the Milky Way. If there is such evidence, please let me know!) So yeah, let's please lay off the speculation, please! SpartHawg948 04:31, February 13, 2010 (UTC)

True, but its never stated that the Reapers only make one of their kind per 50,000 years, and the Leviathan of Dis is a "synthetic warship", hence why I placed that. Making one Reaper seems a little counter-productive. MasterChief117 18:27, February 14, 2010 (UTC)


 * No, it's not a synthetic warship, it's a genetically engineered warship. Big difference. If bio-engineered and synthetic are to be taken as synonymous now, that means Grunt is a synthetic krogan. And making only one Reaper per every 50,000 years or whatever may seem counter-productive to you, but remember that the Reapers are the ultimate in long-view mentality. SpartHawg948 23:30, February 14, 2010 (UTC)

Reaper's Multiple AIs
In ME2 Legion states that Sovereign (Nazara) has multiple AI Programs, seeing as Reapers are made from millions, quite possibly billions, of a species, would the theory of these 'programs' actually being the minds (left anomolies in the genetic paste, therefore "defect") of the victims as a side effect. Intentionally or not, these "defects" could've caused the Machines to be sentient with the altered minds of the masses that were used to make it. It would seem plausible, I don't believe the Collectors or Harbinger uploaded a mass of AI's into the Human Reaper at the end of ME2. Zetomb 09:46, February 16, 2010 (UTC)

No the collectors uploaded humans in the human reaperThe geth rule 02:07, March 10, 2010 (UTC)


 * I think it's possible that the Reapers retain the minds/memories/knowledge of the race used to create it. I'm sure though that what Legion was referring to is that all the Reapers are networked together, like the geth. Shadowdragon00000 03:49, March 10, 2010 (UTC)
 * Exactly what I thought. Hoping more light gets shined onto this topic because it is quite interesting imo. Zetomb 08:29, May 16, 2010 (UTC)
 * Given how memories are believed to be created and stored within human brains this is highly unlikely (Bioware do seem to follow current scientific knowledge where possible.) Memories are largely formed of complex interactions between neurones (often >1000 contacts with other neurones per neurone) located within the limbic system of the brain. If a human was reduced to an organic metal these interconnections would be lost and as such memories would go with it. Paz444 09:33, May 16, 2010 (UTC)
 * Exactly what I thought. Hoping more light gets shined onto this topic because it is quite interesting imo. Zetomb 08:29, May 16, 2010 (UTC)
 * Given how memories are believed to be created and stored within human brains this is highly unlikely (Bioware do seem to follow current scientific knowledge where possible.) Memories are largely formed of complex interactions between neurones (often >1000 contacts with other neurones per neurone) located within the limbic system of the brain. If a human was reduced to an organic metal these interconnections would be lost and as such memories would go with it. Paz444 09:33, May 16, 2010 (UTC)
 * Given how memories are believed to be created and stored within human brains this is highly unlikely (Bioware do seem to follow current scientific knowledge where possible.) Memories are largely formed of complex interactions between neurones (often >1000 contacts with other neurones per neurone) located within the limbic system of the brain. If a human was reduced to an organic metal these interconnections would be lost and as such memories would go with it. Paz444 09:33, May 16, 2010 (UTC)


 * Or the minds of the victim can be scanned before they are broken down and turned into a reaper, we dont know exactly how the process works, but it seems to me the reapers beleive they are granintg immortality to those they deem worthy of sruvval, and i find it likely that the multiple ais in the reapers are createdbased on minds of enitre civilizations and species, this is why i think nazara is not sovereigns name but sovereigns sbaseline species. Clearly though the actual mind is not being transferred likely just the collective memrories and experiences of entire peoples, the biologicaland technological distinctiveness survives but tnot the peoples themselves. ralok 17:28, May 16, 2010 (UTC)
 * I dunno. I'm still not sold on this 'Reapers think they're giving organics immortality' thing. They do, after all, describe their actions as a cycle of extinction. Extinction as in killing off an entire species. The immortality claims are likely just lies and propaganda of the sort Sovereign used to snare Saren. SpartHawg948 17:37, May 16, 2010 (UTC)
 * It could be a side effect as some of exlectrical impulses could be carried through (memories etc.) and contianed within the genetic paste which is used to make the Reaper. The Reapers may also require this to actually gain awareness, basic functions, etc.. Seeing as the Reapers are seemingly 100% synthetic (from Biological Materials) the first creators (Biological Entities) would have tried to make Reapers on small scale and found that left over eletrical signals from the brains of the species used are what makes the Reapers fully aware, sentient, Multiple AI housing machines that they are. Who knows, it's a very interesting topic. Zetomb 05:02, May 22, 2010 (UTC)
 * It could be a side effect as some of exlectrical impulses could be carried through (memories etc.) and contianed within the genetic paste which is used to make the Reaper. The Reapers may also require this to actually gain awareness, basic functions, etc.. Seeing as the Reapers are seemingly 100% synthetic (from Biological Materials) the first creators (Biological Entities) would have tried to make Reapers on small scale and found that left over eletrical signals from the brains of the species used are what makes the Reapers fully aware, sentient, Multiple AI housing machines that they are. Who knows, it's a very interesting topic. Zetomb 05:02, May 22, 2010 (UTC)

Mass Effect 2 spoilers
I think there are many spoilers about ME2 in the section before the ME2 spoiler warning. For example Human-Reaper, reproduction theories, Harbinger and the awakening of Reaper Fleet.

I understand it is hard to separate these facts based on the game or book they were introduced. Therefore the first spoiler warning should make it clear the article contains spoilers for ME, ME2 and ME: Revelation. L3zl13 09:53, February 21, 2010 (UTC)


 * Everything you just mentioned is after the ME2 spoiler tag, not before it. SpartHawg948 10:26, February 21, 2010 (UTC)
 * The sections Cycle of Extinction and Characteristics are before the ME2 spoiler tag for example. And these contain information about the Human-Reaper, Harbinger and the Reaper fleet's awakening at the end of ME2. L3zl13 17:57, February 21, 2010 (UTC)


 * Just to close this off, I moved the spoiler tag up, and removed the spoilers from the lede entirely. ShadowRanger 18:28, February 25, 2010 (UTC)

2 possible Reaper references/relations
I was recently considering what other races in fiction the Reapers might be similar to. Off the top of my head, the Necrons from Warhammer 40,000 are pretty similar for the following reasons:

-like the Reapers, the Necrons are an ancient, awakening machine-race who are utterly devoted to the eradication of all life. Also like the Reapers, their technology is well beyond that of any of the other civilized races in WH40k.

-both races have an emphasis on their own eternal nature: Sovereign states that "we are eternal," and in Wh40k, it is difficult to truly kill a Necron-- when severely damaged, it merely phases out and returns completely repaired.

-The Reapers are so named, most likely, because of their habit of annihilating all life. The Necrons, in galactic prehistory, also eradicated so many life forms that their image has become automatically synonymous with death in the subconscious of all civilized species

-The Human-Reaper kind of looks like a Necron.

Bear in mind, however, that as far as appearance and tendency to self-repair goes, the Necrons themselves appear to be based heavily on Skynet's robots from the Terminator series.

Alternatively, there are numerous "living ships" in fiction, such as:

-Moya from Farscape

-the LEXX

-"Tin Man" from one episode of Star Trek: TNG

Any number of which could have been an inspiration for the Reapers.SuperLoNC 17:56, March 1, 2010 (UTC)

Do we need all this trivia on similarities?
Do we really need all this trivia on similarities? I mean one is fine but when you get past four my first reaction is "Yah, I get it already. Giant, evil, space creatures is a popular trope in science fiction."Bastian964 23:09, March 16, 2010 (UTC)

Nah. Less is always more when it comes to trivia sections. Matt 2108 23:10, March 16, 2010 (UTC)

FreeSpace Reference to the Reapers
http://www.hard-light.net/wiki/images/Sddemon-old.jpg

http://www.hard-light.net/wiki/index.php/File:Sjsathanas-old.jpg

http://www.hard-light.net/wiki/index.php/File:Sjsathanas.jpg

Is it possible BioWare copied this Design? Mau5killer 17:11, March 21, 2010 (UTC)Mau5killer


 * There are some striking resemblances, especially the "head" structure. Bioware's are more squid-like in design, though, while FreeSpace looks more artificial and machine-like with all the sharp angles. They could very well have been an inspiration. &mdash;ArmeniusLOD 17:55, March 21, 2010 (UTC)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LoMBao0OKX0&NR=1

That is a video of the "claws" of the Sathanas in action. Actually highly resembles the claws of the Reapers, just in different positions. you only have to watch until :50.

Keep in mind that is game is from 1998 and 1999

Mau5killer 18:07, March 21, 2010 (UTC)Mau5killer

Yeah, I was going to mention the game being more than 10 years old. Sovereign's model is probably more than 100,000 polygons, while the ones here are probably a few hundred to a thousand polygons. The "legs" still look more insect-like; like claws or pincers. Reapers' legs are more like tentacles. I've played through Descent 1 & 2, but never got around to trying Freespace. I was in sort of a technological void around that time. &mdash;ArmeniusLOD 18:23, March 21, 2010 (UTC)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VNzB2KPgENs&feature=related

Gives you a certain feel of Mass Effect, when Sovereign first attacked Eden Prime, and no one knew what was happening until it was too late.

also, can I please get some more people's opinion on the posted videos and pictures?

Mau5killer 20:08, March 21, 2010 (UTC)Mau5killer

FreeSpace Correlations to Mass Effect 1 and perhaps 2
Reapers = Shivans.

Ancients = Protheans.

Knossos Portal = Mass Relays

Prothean Technology which turned out to be built by the Reapers = Ancients Technology actually built by the Shivans

GTVA = Citadel Council

GTVA Colossus = Destiny Ascension (In terms of Size and Fire Power)

Neo-Terran Front = Terminus Systems Residents (Pirates, Thieves, etc etc)

Reapers 50,000 Year Cycle of Extinction = Shivans 30 year Cycle of Extinction (Past pre-set boundary)

ETAK Project = Cerberus's Attempts to Study the Derelict Reaper.

SD Demon = Striking Resemblance to Harbinger picture (at the end of the Game, When Joker Hands the Data Pad to Shepard)

Thoughts? Comments? Mau5killer 20:16, March 21, 2010 (UTC)Mau5killer


 * SD Demon/Harbinger. No links were provided, and I'm not familiar with this franchise, so I can only assume that what I found was what was being referred to, but here goes.


 * The Reapers/Shivans- Seen no indication of anything other than visual similarities, certianly nothing that indicates that the Shivans are a sentient race of massive, incredibly powerful ships.


 * Ancients/Protheans- No real correlation noted. The ancients are described as arrogant, warlike, and expansionist. This description doesn't fit the Protheans at all. The Ancients are also mentioned as not being more than a few decades ahead (technologically speaking) of the current poweres in FreeSpace, which again does not correlate to the Protheans.


 * Knossos/Mass Relays- one is a massive network spanning the galaxy (and apparently beyond). The other isn't. There are only 3 known portals. Pretty clear-cut.


 * Prothean/Ancient Tech- similarities based entirely on the notion that these races correlate.


 * GTVA/Council- One is a two-party military alliance formed out of desperation, the other is a massive galactic government encompassing many known species for whom collective defense is a priority, but not the only priority.


 * GTVA Colossus/Destiny Ascension- Both big ships. Any further similarity predicated on the notion that the two governing bodies are similar.


 * Neo-Terran Front/Terminus. One is a rebel group of humans. The other is a region of space with multiple indigenous species plus immigrants from Council space bound solely by a desire to avoid Citadel governance.


 * Cycle of extinction- couldn't find reference to a Shivan 30-yr cycle of extinction.


 * ETAK/Cerberus- one is an attempt to arrange communications between a rebel group and a group of aliens. The other is a scientific study of a supposedly dead sentient starship for the purpose of finding ways to defeat its race. Hardly similar.


 * SD Demon/Harbinger- I don't see it. I'd maybe say vaguely similar, but definitely not strikingly similar. How can it be striking similar when it doesn't even look anything like a cuttlefish, which Harbinger does closely resemble? And those are my thoughts. SpartHawg948 20:40, March 21, 2010 (UTC)

For Links, look at the section above this one Mau5killer 20:43, March 21, 2010 (UTC)Mau5killer


 * Yeah, but links would have made it easier, especially since there are instances where the terms you used don't mesh with the article names on the Freespace wiki. SpartHawg948 20:46, March 21, 2010 (UTC)

you mean Hardlight? I personally doubt Hardlight is part of the Wikia Project Mau5killer 20:51, March 21, 2010 (UTC)Mau5killer. Also, your comment about Harbinger looking like the SD Demon, If you remove the upper jutting part of the Demon, and somewhat replace the legs, it looks alot like Harbinger Mau5killer 20:51, March 21, 2010 (UTC)Mau5killer

After looking through the Images you provided, The Legs i admit do not really resemble that of the Demon, but the Rail gun does somewhat look like it, and look particularly at the Reaper WITHOUT a spinal mounted rail gun at the Top, to the right of Harbinger. The head is triangular though, that you have to admit Mau5killer 20:56, March 21, 2010 (UTC)Mau5killer
 * Maybe a little bit, but other than that, nothing. They don't carry themselves the same way, as Harbinger is oriented much more vertically, and the SD Demon lacks the tentacles, the prominent eyes, the arching back, basically, everything that makes it obvious that this is A) Harbinger, and B) A Reaper. And as I pointed out above, there really aren't any similarities between the two franchises, at least not in what you highlighted. Certainly no more similarities than you could find with most any sci-fi franchise. Just off the top of my head, without even consulting wookieepedia, I can probably come up with nearly as many correlations, some of which would work much better than the FreeSpace ones. And I'm pretty darn sure I could make a more compelling case for vast similarities between the Stargate franchise and Mass Effect than I've seen linking ME to FreeSpace, at least up to this point. SpartHawg948 21:07, March 21, 2010 (UTC)

Look the the Bosch Monologues and the Ancients Monologues from Freespace 2 and 1. There is a cycle of Extinction Mentioned.
 * I will in a bit. (Have some errands to run) Again, I'm not familiar with this franchise. All I know is you referenced a Shivan 30-year cycle of extinction, I went to the Shivan article, and nothing of the sort was mentioned. Again though, I pointed out numerous issues with the comparisons, not just this one, so it seems to me to be just another case of unintentional sci-fi similarities that comes with the territory. SpartHawg948 21:14, March 21, 2010 (UTC)
 * Also, in an aside, the above is why I pointed out that links would have been nice. You mentioned a Shivan 30-year cycle of extinction and had previously provided links to the FreeSpace wiki, so it stands to reason that there must be A) An article on said cycle of extinction, or B) A mention of it in the Shivan article, but neither is true. Instead, apparently one would be required to look at the "Bosch Monologues" and the "Ancients Monologues", which is something someone unfamiliar with the franchise would have no way of knowing. This is why, when you ask for comments, links to the subject you want comments about are nice. SpartHawg948 21:47, March 21, 2010 (UTC)

On a related note- can you provide links to either the Bosch Monologues or the Ancients Monologues? Again, no mention of either on the FreeSpace wiki. SpartHawg948 21:51, March 21, 2010 (UTC)

DON'T TRUST FREESPACE.WIKIA.COM. ITS STILL BRAND NEW. TRUST HARD-LIGHT

The Bosch Monologues (All Four)

Bosch 1

Bosch2

Bosch 3

Bosch 4

Now, I know I said 30-year cycle, but its actually an x year cycle past a Species pre-set evolution Boundary. If a species evolves technology past that boundary, other species that are capable of Evolution and Space-faring Technology are in danger of dying. [http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i5sdlDK0TOw See : Speech after cool explosion. ]

Ancients Monologues

Ancient 1

Ancients 2

Ancients 3

Ancients 4

Ancients 5

Note how the Great Destroyers pursued them. Mau5killer 01:14, March 22, 2010 (UTC)Mau5killer
 * Just a quick note- I wasn't trusting freespace.wikia.com. All the info I got was obtained from Hard-Light. SpartHawg948 03:31, March 22, 2010 (UTC)

Well, review the monologues. and the ending of freespace one. the narrator implies some sort of cycle, about how humanity spear headed their way, and no one stopped them. and the ancients also spear headed their way into the universe, and no one stopped them.


 * OK, so out of those five videos (the monologue videos which were the source of the Shivan cycle of extinction) there was ONE where the speaker theorized about a cycle of extinction. One. The topic never came up in the Ancients Monologue. And I did note how the Great Destroyers persued them. I noted, but have no idea why it is apparently relevant. The Reapers don't pursue. The Destroyers pursued the Ancients after the Ancients entered their territory. The Reapers live way out between galaxies where no one can get to them. They don't pursue others for trespassing. It's not a valid comparison. So again, I've seen no evidence of a link between the Shivans and the Reaper cycle of extinction. There are other sci-fi races that engage in similar behavior (the Wraiths from Stargate Atlantis, the Antarans from the Master of Orion series, etc). A cycle of extinction at the hands of a more powerful race is hardly a new concept. If this was the only bone of contention, maybe I'd be willing to accept it, but it isn't. I raised concerns with every single comparison you attempted to make, and the vast majority have gone unanswered. Again, this concept is hardly unique to FreeSpace and Mass Effect. If it's going to be noted in the article, there needs to be much more to go on than extremely vague similarities. SpartHawg948 03:50, March 22, 2010 (UTC)

Now Sir, I am not trying to list anything in any article, I am simply stating whether or not there is any correlation between the matters.

The Ancients did not know why they came, but the speaker at the end of the Freespace 1 ending (video was not posted, find it on youtube) knew. Their Territory was not invaded. When the Ancients stepped forth into the Universe, no one stopped them. they were the only species. how they acquired their technology was unknown, could have been pre-built by previous species, or even the Great Destroyers (Shivans). When the Terrans (Humans) Stepped forth, no one stopped them either. But they found remains of the Ancients existence. The Shivans Came for the Ancients, and the Shivans came for the Human-Vasudan alliance. More will be added once my brain is sorted out, it hurts at this point Mau5killer 04:14, March 22, 2010 (UTC)Mau5killer
 * If you don't want anything included in the article, may I request that you move this to the forums or your userpage? Article talk pages such as these are solely for the purpose of discussing article content. Sometimes the discussions do go off on tangents, but massive threads like this that are apparently not geared toward the content of the article in question have no place in an article's talk page. SpartHawg948 04:18, March 22, 2010 (UTC)

Trivia
As a reference to H.P.Lovecraft and his Cthulhu mythos, I was struck (on Eden Prime, in ME1) and by images viewed just how much the Reapers looked like the classic description of Cthulhu. Huge, beyond comprehension. Tentacles. Massive devastation left behind, simply as a result of the attention. I don't know how much Bioware took from that conceptualization, but the parts that they did take were (in my opinion) well-integrated into the rest of the series. Just a kudo to whoever mentioned it. :) Kyanha 23:32, April 28, 2010 (UTC)

Opening Quote
Does anybody else feel the opening quote on this page would be better if changed to the "You have the attention of those infinitely greater than you" said at the end of ME2?
 * I dunno. I like the current one better. It actually addresses the subject matter and the title of the article. I can't think of a better way to open the article than by offering a first-hand account of where the title 'Reaper' comes from. The other quote would work nice elsewhere in the article, perhaps at the beginning of the ME2 section, but I think the current quote works better as the article opener. SpartHawg948 08:21, May 20, 2010 (UTC)

Alright, this is gonna bug me if I don't say anything. The quote is "Your species has the attention of those infinitely your greater." (jeez, Harbinger's dialogue is cool!) I'm sure you knew that. As for the quote, I say leave it. --Effectofthemassvariety 09:29, May 20, 2010 (UTC)
 * I agree. The currnet quote is perfect and works well. It is good and one of my favorite quotes by a Reaper. In this case Sovereign. Lancer1289 17:44, May 20, 2010 (UTC)

Reapers aren't living beings?
What constitutes "living" being? Reapers move, think, reproduce. We don't know if they eat, or if they have their own equivalent of eating. But we do know that they reproduce though their means of reproduction is bizarre. It is even more advanced than the geth--that thinks, moves, is sentient, evolves, but as far as we know, doesn't reproduce. The geth is not an organic race, and we should not judge "living" from a purely organic point of view. The conversation between Shep and Legion in the beginning of its loyalty mission warns us not to. Thus we should not regard the Reaper as a non-living, sentient being, just because it's not 100% organic. There is even a DEAD Reaper--from which we should conclude that there are LIVING Reapers. Isn't that so? Braveangel 01:17, May 21, 2010 (UTC)
 * I have had this discussion many times and for scifi differs on what constitues a living being. For some it is the ability to think, move, reproduce (in some form). However then others stay that a living being is just organic. You do bring up a valid point but I believe we call it a Derelict Reaper not a dead one. However that is contridicated by other sources becuase the scientisits refer to it as dead. So, I tend to go with the looser definition of living on this on, in calling them a Living Being. However, in terms of the ME Universe, I'd have to say they are non-living becuase they aren't organic and the universe doesn't give living status to AIs as well. That is my opinion on the subject. Overall: Living, but in terms of the game, which is the real context here, non-living. Lancer1289 01:32, May 21, 2010 (UTC)

They're as alive as Skynet from Terminator, or the robots from Transformers. They are sentient synthetic beings. I wouldn't really consider them alive any more than I would consider a toaster to be alive if it is operational and fulfilling its intended function. As is stated above, the so-called 'dead' Reaper is actually derelict. In fact, it isn't even completely non-functional. If it were, the scientists wouldn't have gone all wacko, would they? So no, Reapers aren't really alive, as they aren't organic but rather synthetic. At least, that's my opinion. SpartHawg948 01:34, May 21, 2010 (UTC)


 * I just want to know what's considered canon here. Some other universes do have 100% organic, sentient ships. But the ones we find in the ME Universe are either organics, synthetics or hybrid sentient beings. Reapers being the only ones that are hybrid--both synths and orgs at the same time. So, only 100% organic beings may be considered "living" in ME Universe?Braveangel 01:52, May 21, 2010 (UTC)
 * For that we really need devconfirmation. However for the purposes of now, I'd have to say, givin the in-game example I have above, 100% organic seems to be living. Again we really need devconfirmation here. Spart care to shead some light with your opinion. Lancer1289 01:55, May 21, 2010 (UTC)

Well, it seems to me that calling Reapers 'hybrids' is a bit of a stretch. It's possible for a completely synthetic construct to be built or operated with some organic components without being itself an organic-synthetic hybrid. We'd need to know what the organic component was used for in order to ascertain this. As far as we have seen, synthetic artificial intelligences and synthetic beings are not considered alive in Mass Effect. AIs and VIs are not considered alive, and the geth don't seem to be either. SpartHawg948 02:09, May 21, 2010 (UTC)
 * I think I can agree with that. So for our purposes only organic species are living and alive. I forgot about the geth and VIs. Lancer1289 02:12, May 21, 2010 (UTC)

I think Commander Shepard summed it up best when he (or she) told Sovereign- 'You're not even alive. Not really. You're just a machine, and machines can be broken.' (about 3:45 in, during one of my favorite parts of ME) SpartHawg948 02:28, May 21, 2010 (UTC)
 * As I read that, I have to think about bashing my head into a wall becuase I completely forgot about it. That quote alone seems to settle the matter. I hope. Lancer1289 02:32, May 21, 2010 (UTC)

If you mold two different materials together to achieve a new kind of implement, that's called a "hybrid". And, as far as we know, the genetic materials of the abducted humans are injected into the embryonic-Reaper. That qualifies a Reaper as organic-cybernetic hybrid. As for Shep's comments, they are often derogatory towards synthetic beings--as a conversation with Legion shows. A common attitude in the ME Universe. So, while Shep regards Sovereign as "just machine", Sov regards Shep and other organic life-forms as beneath them. "Infinitely greater" are the words used by Harbinger. I won't dispute the rule that synthetic beings do not count as "living being" for this site. But it seems to me that the ME Universe shows that organic races often (if not always) hold contempt towards synthetics, and in some cases (like the geth) the synthetics are willing to wage wars in order to gain their independence from organic beings. Braveangel 03:13, May 21, 2010 (UTC)
 * I still can se hybrid as a little bit of a stretch, even with what you just mentioned. We only know how the Human Reaper was created, we have absolutly no idea how the rest were so hybrid still is a stretch. If I remember correclty all the Reapers seen in the closing cutscene of ME2, show Sovereign-like Reapers, no others are seen. I could see the Human Reaper as a hybrid because of the liquid but I still can't see the rest because we don't know how they were created. For that reason, I can only see the Human Reaper as a hybrid. As to the contempt, I think that it is a direct result of the geth and nothing more. However we really don't have that much of a history on that point. Holding a grudge, seems to me to more caution that anything else as the geth accident doesn't want to be repeated. Finally as to synthetics waring to get their independence, that is all too common in scifi, and the geth had a very good reason to do so. Lancer1289 03:23, May 21, 2010 (UTC)

And again, just because a machine uses organic matter in some capacity, whether it be during construction or during normal operations, that does not make it a synthetic-organic hybrid. If it did, then most automobiles would be synthetic-organic hybrids. After all, pretty much any automobile other than electric cars uses some sort of organic matter as fuel, whether it be in the form of decomposed animal and plant remains, or fuel derived from plants such as corn and sugar, or animal fat. That doesn't make them 'hybrids'. So no, the fact that liquefied organic matter is injected into Reapers during construction (which isn't a given, as it's only been demonstrated to happen once, without it being stated if other Reapers are built this way) does not make them organic-cybernetic hybrids. After all, isn't gasoline just liquefied organic matter? SpartHawg948 03:37, May 21, 2010 (UTC)


 * Even in the main article, it is cited "This diversity is presumably due to the Reapers reproduction method, in which vast numbers of a single species are harvested, melted down into a raw genetic paste then used to construct a 'larva', that takes on the characteristics of the species it was created from" though the basic design of a Reaper is still a Reaper Cuttlefish. Granted, we know this as EDI's speculation on the data available. And the conversation with Sovereign implies that the Reapers "harvest" organic life. Considering all data available, I admit that "hybrid" is a conclusion based on EDI's take on the data, on circumstantial evidence. ME3 will cast lights on this matter. But, if EDI is right on the Reapers' reproduction method, then they are truly a synth-organic hybrid. Then again, synthetics view organics as lesser beings, and vice versa. If we side with the organics' point of view that synthetics are not in fact living beings, I concede. Braveangel 03:47, May 21, 2010 (UTC)

And as you say, the Reaper reproduction theory is based on one unique example and speculation from a computer. It is not known if all Reapers come to be in this manner. For all we know, they use organics as fuel, and the cycle of extinction is just a cycle of resource extraction and exploitation for them. IF EDI is correct, then it would be acceptable to call them organic-synthetic hybrids, but that is not known at this time. SpartHawg948 04:03, May 21, 2010 (UTC)

My 2 cents, Living Ogranism msut show atleast 1 of the following at any given time:

1. Resporation. 2. Growth. 3. Reproduction. 4. Nutrition (eating etc.) 5. Excretion. 6. Movement. and 7. Sensitiviy (reaction to external stimuli). I see the Reapers show: 2(Reaper Larvae etc.), 3(creating new reapers(in a way repoductoin)), 6(how else do they kill?) and 7. I would classify Reapers as Organic-Synthetic Hybrids. Nothing more, nothing less. Zetomb 05:08, May 22, 2010 (UTC)
 * But by that logic, cars could also be considered living organisms. After all, it could be argued that they 1) engage in respiration (as cars must take in oxygen to function). 2) They 'grow' in exactly the same sense that the Human-Reaper was growing (i.e. by being constructed and having new components installed). 4) They must take in fuel to function. 5) They excrete as a result of consuming fuel and respiration. 6) They move. Machines can do most of the things you listed there. They can even 'reproduce' in much the same fashion as Reapers have been seen to do. After all, many factories to employ robots to build other machines, including other robots. SpartHawg948 05:19, May 22, 2010 (UTC)

HA! Good point. But here's my 12 cents (HA!) I believe that if and when AI ever becomes so advanced in the real world, we can have the discussion ourselves. Obviously, in the game world, the discussion has already taken place, and AI is not considered to be living. So in the interest of keeping everything true to the ME universe, I'd say that they are not living beings. Now let me pat myself on the back for adding to an already resolved situation. "Good job Effect! You were great!" "No, you were great!" :P --Effectofthemassvariety 07:10, May 22, 2010 (UTC)


 * HA! Then I up the bet to 22 cents. LOL. But in ME universe, the discussion that concludes that AI and synth are not in fact living beings is carried out exclusively by organics. It's like exclusively men leaders of certain countries decide what women are, and should be doing. In-game, the geth rejects the notion that they are "just machine"--thus the Morning War. Legion even complains that humans abhor slavery yet put shackles on EDI and other AIs. Later we know that there's a splinter geth group that takes this notion one notch further: they aspire to dominate all life forms. We do not know for certain if the Reapers are really living beings at this moment for lack of data. But Sovereign, at least, claims that they are beyond our comprehension. Certainly it considers itself as "living", or at least creator-less. ME3 might shed some lights on this, especially on Reapers' origin, or not. I, for one, accept that for now we can't say that Reapers are "alive" from the organics' perspectives. But then again, an exclusively organics' perspective (in the ME universe) IS prejudiced against synthetics--heavily prejudiced, IMHO. Braveangel 07:42, May 22, 2010 (UTC)

I understand, but the perspective from which we are entering the game is from a human perspective. (Did I just say that?) It honestly doesn't matter what we think, what matters is what the in-game humans think. Since they think, at least for now, that AI's, and anything resembling them (Reapers) are not, in fact, living beings, then who are we to say that they are wrong? We are merely observers. And while it's true that there is little true data on the Reapers, for now they are considered basically the same as the geth: Non-Living Artificial Beings. --Effectofthemassvariety 07:53, May 22, 2010 (UTC)
 * (edit conflict) But Sovereign never states that it or any other Reapers are alive. To infer that it considers itself living on the basis of comments which don't say anything of the sort is pure speculation. So is saying that the Morning War was evidence of the geth rejecting the notion that they are machines. Again, nothing of the sort is stated. The quarians tried to destroy the geth, and the geth fought back. Thus the Morning War (to quote you). You state that organics saying synthetics are not living is like men deciding what women are and should be doing. I don't think that this is a valid comparison, as the difference between a human and a geth (or a Reaper) is much, much bigger than the difference between men and women. In this case, we have beings that are indisputably living making a judgment call on whether or not machines that were built in a factory are alive. Much different than men and women. SpartHawg948 07:55, May 22, 2010 (UTC)

(edit conflict) Also, I too hope that ME3 sheds a little (and by that I mean a lot) light on the subject of the Reapers. I just gotta know more about them. They are very interesting, and mysterious. Kinda like Boba Fett, except Huge, and they want to kill all of the galaxy... :) --Effectofthemassvariety 08:00, May 22, 2010 (UTC)


 * You're right. Sovereign never does claim that it is alive. It claims that they are beyond our comprehension. While we take our definition of life as superior, Sovereign claims that they are the pinnacle of evolution and existence. It ridicules our whole notions of the universe, saying that we can not even grasp the nature of their existence. The geth certainly regard themselves as 100% software, not a "machine" by our standards. And Shep certainly warns us not to judge others by our own standards, what Legion calls "benign anthromorphism". (It is ironic, for the game is rife with it.) Mostly, in-game we see the organics' POV on this matter. However, though few and far between, we also see the synths' POV. Again, it's one (several) sentient being(s) claiming the right to define other sentient being(s). And that's my comparison was for: sentient men define what sentient women are--even as far as defining women as "properties" in some cases. Braveangel 08:54, May 22, 2010 (UTC)
 * Regardless, by the very definition of the word, geth and Reapers are not alive. Life is defined firstly as "the condition that distinguishes organisms from inorganic objects and dead organisms", and geth and Reapers are inorganic (well, Reapers appear to contain some organic material, but are mostly inorganic, and consider themselves inorganic). So it's not that it's organics 'claiming the right to define other sentient being(s)'. The preexisting definition of the word, conceived long before there were even inklings of synthetic intelligence, rules out the prospect of machines like the geth and the Reapers being alive. In order for them to be, the word needs to be redefined, which could be construed as the synthetic races claiming the right to redefine fundamental concepts of other sentient races cultures and existences, couldn't it? It's not that any organics in ME are altering the definition of alive to exclude synthetics, its that synthetics (or their proponents) are attempting to alter the definition to suit their own ends and desires. SpartHawg948 09:45, May 22, 2010 (UTC)

Ha! Then I guess I must put two bucks on the table. (::biggrin::) It's now getting really interesting. There are actually two cases of sentient synthetic beings: the geth and the Reapers. They are very different. The geth began as machines. As soon as they gained sentience, their creators were afraid. Sentience means independence, freewill, aspirations, self-determination. Things that hitherto were exclusively organics'. Unwilling to grant these things to their creations, the quarians began to destroy their machines. And the Morning War broke out. The geth won, and thought they had secured their countinued existence. Later, after the splinter groups went out to whoreship (pun intended) Nazarra, the geth began to rethink their strategy. They began to try and learn the organics' POV. They specifically created Legion to be a kind of investigator in the organics' world, to learn about a unique organic individual, Commander Shepard. This concise history of the geth does show that, while they do not try to alter the definition of "life", they do try to acquire the rights of continued existence and self-determination--rights insofar only available to organic sentient species--and are prepared to defend those rights should organics try to take those from them. The Reapers are a different case altogether. Much of their history is unknown. Clearly they dismiss organic life-forms as inferior, only their existence matters. By force, they have assumed the right to exist alone in the universe, completely disregarding what organics think of them. To sum up: the geth want to be treated as equal to the organic life forms, regardless of being considered "alive" or not; the Reapers disregard completely the concept of "life" as understood by organic life-forms. Both are not "alive" by organics' standards, but both have their own definition of their respective existence. Braveangel 10:52, May 22, 2010 (UTC)

Quite a thought-provoking discussion! My 2 creds is that composition should not be used to determine whether something is alive. The type of material that constitutes a being is just a means to an end—namely, the processes of living. Whether the body enabling those processes is carbon-based or not ought to make no difference. In fact, the mere knowledge of something's chemical makeup isn't necessarily helpful. A human corpse, for example, is wholly organic yet also non-living. The real question is this: What processes do all living things perform which the Reapers (or the geth) cannot perform? I've been racking my brain to find a plausible answer to this, with no luck. That's why I'm inclined to confer the status of "living beings" on both races. Shenshema 20:35, May 27, 2010 (UTC)
 * How about reproduce without the use of support equipment/materials such as factories or construction equipment or shipyards? That seems like a good one to me. Humans and asari and quarians and whatnot can just have children, plain and simple. Reapers, on the other hand, appear to need massive support systems which were artificially created by third parties and which require external resources, such as metal and organic beings and other components. The ability to reproduce independent of outside resources and facilities seems like something that should differentiate between living and non-living, at least if we're going on the basis of what do all living things do that the Reapers and geth can't. SpartHawg948 21:06, May 27, 2010 (UTC)
 * Isn't that condition too restrictive? Many living things are incapable of reproducing at all, such as infertile mules and hinnies. Shenshema 22:25, May 27, 2010 (UTC)
 * Actually, mules and hinnies are not infertile. They rarely produce offspring (I believe there are about 60 documented cases of them giving birth in the past 500 years or so), but they can reproduce. And those are individual exceptions to a more generalized rule. Even if individual lving things are sterile, they themselves still came about as a result of biological means. My point was that Reapers and geth are incapable of reproduction to sustain their numbers without an industrial support base. This to me would seem to be a good differentiator between living and nonliving. If a species can reproduce without requiring factories to be built to produce new members, they are living. If a complex industrial base is required for the production of new members, they aren't. SpartHawg948 22:36, May 27, 2010 (UTC)
 * My original statement was "many living things are incapable of reproducing". I don't think the situation changes if we amend it to say " few living things are incapable of reproducing". The presence of even one counterexample renders false any universal claim that "All living things can reproduce biologically". Shenshema 01:59, May 28, 2010 (UTC)

Not really. A few genetic anomalies don't counter the fact that living species are capable of reproduction to perpetuate their species independent of industrial facilities. My comment was concerned with living species, not individuals. And last I checked, mules and hinnies aren't species. They are individual genetic hybrids. If you can find me an example of a living species which is incapable of reproducing without the use of factories or shipyards or whatnot, that would render my claim false. SpartHawg948 03:12, May 28, 2010 (UTC)
 * Hmm... I'm a little confused here. Individuals are tangible objects. Species are abstract sets of individuals with shared characteristics. When we call an individual organism "living", don't we mean it in a different sense than when we call a species "living"? Consider: any individual man can be analyzed to determine whether he is alive or not. However, we only call Homo sapiens a "living" species in a metaphorical way, i.e. it is "living" if it has a sustainable population, it is "dying" if its population is not sustainable, and it is "extinct" if it has no extant members. I think to keep the issue clear, we should be focusing on whether individual Reapers qualify as living things. After all, biologists don't taxonomize until they determine whether what they're dealing with is even alive and falls under their purview. Shenshema 23:54, May 28, 2010 (UTC)

I get what you're saying, but the point I'm trying to make is that even on an individual level, Reapers aren't born. They are manufactured. In fact, there's something all living creatures can do that Reapers can't- be born parents that were themselves born. Reapers do not give birth to other Reapers. Individual Reapers (from what we've seen) are constructed in shipyards/factories, not born. Other than a very few exceptions engineered by scientists in labs, all living things are born. Reapers are not. They are built. SpartHawg948 00:57, May 29, 2010 (UTC)

I have to agree with SpartHawg on this. It seems like the Reapers are a result of what was originally some form of AI or synthetic that underwent significant change through something that mimics to evolution, pretty much a more powerful copy of the Geth later on. But the idea of something like this is not unprecedented. If anyone has read Swarm by Michael Crighton, he writes about a swarm of nanobots that were encoded with an evolutionary algorithm that led to them mimicing a living thing's ability to evolve. The nanobots were, in pretty much every way, a predator, but a nonliving predator nontheless. Plus, they still needed to be produced by machines combined with bacteria. Another example of a nonliving thing is a virus. Viruses cannot reproduce on their own, just like the Reapers, which is what sells it for me. Viruses are almost idenctical to bacteria except that they cannot reproduce on their own, and that is why they are considered nonliving. Darpod016 01:45, May 29, 2010 (UTC)

Okay, I have a couple of points to make so let's split them up in an orderly fashion:
 * Don't we judge whether something is a living thing by what it does (or is capable of doing) rather than its origins? A human corpse obviously no longer performs the processes we deem necessary to qualify it as living (whatever those processes may be). However, we consider the corpse non-living even though it was birthed at some time in the past through biological means. The way I see it, I may know how an object came to be, but it doesn't help me to evaluate in the here and now whether that object can be called a living thing.
 * If we're talking about individual Reapers, then we should compare what they can or cannot do against other individuals which we already agree to call living. Given this, if your claim is something like "All living individuals can reproduce biologically", then the fact that individuals exist which we can both agree are 1) living and 2) infertile means your claim is untenable. Right now, that's my main hangup about your proposal (which I otherwise think has merit). Does this make sense? Please correct me if I'm messing up the logic here, misinterpreting your claim, etc. Shenshema 09:40, May 29, 2010 (UTC)
 * But a human corpse was formerly living. And no, to answer your point, a human corpse that was formerly living wasn't 'birthed' as a corpse (with the obvious exception of stillbirths). Regardless, my point still stands that all living creatures are born. And Reapers are not. They are constructed. Again, that's my main point. If it requires external industrial facilities to produce a being (such as a factory or a shipyard), it isn't a living being, it's a manufactured synthetic one. As for the second bit, we can both also agree, I'm sure, that the only thing keeping the infertile creatures from reproducing is a genetic abnormality or other physical deficiency. Using that exception to disprove the rule is like pointing to a person in a persistent vegetative state to disprove the rule that humans are sentient/sapient beings capable of making decisions based on the world around them. SpartHawg948 20:24, May 29, 2010 (UTC)
 * A human adult that is currently living wasn't born as an adult either! I bring that up because neither the living adult nor the dead corpse came into being exactly as they are right now. Instead, both were born in the past. Having been born in the past is therefore not a credential that helps us discriminate living from non-living; it applies equally to both. Secondly, you also say I'm using an exception to disprove the rule. However, at this point we're not talking about an established rule but rather a proposed rule. When I go and test your proposed rule, I find that there are exceptions to it. As far as I can tell, these exceptions are meaningful counterexamples. To dismiss them would require justification that isn't arbitrary. Thus, for you to dismiss living infertile individuals on the grounds that they are strange, rare, or unusual seems to me like special pleading. Those considerations have no bearing on the matter, since the aliveness and infertility of these individuals are what is salient. Their strangeness or rarity is irrelevant, just as it is with the one black swan that refutes the claim "All swans are white". Shenshema 23:10, May 30, 2010 (UTC)

Really? Accusing me of making spurious arguments? Thanks. I was hoping to keep this civil. You are correct that a currently living adult wasn't born as an adult. But it was born as a living being. And that's the point I was making. All living creatures are born. It's something they do that non-living synthetic 'creatures' such as geth and Reapers don't do. And as I keep saying, my main point (which you have yet to address) is that living beings do not require external industrial resources such as factories, assembly plants, shipyards, etc. to propagate. Perhaps, rather than leveling accusations, you could address the actual argument at hand? SpartHawg948 23:55, May 30, 2010 (UTC)
 * First: I apologize for coming across as accusatory. Please believe me when I say that I had no intention of insulting you. My only goal, then and now, is to critique your position in good faith. I'm sorry that my crappy phrasing got in the way. As for "special pleading", I mentioned it because it's a type of logical fallacy. You may be familiar with many of them: straw men, slippery slopes, circular reasoning, and so on. By bringing it up, I wasn't attacking you personally, but rather just pointing out that your argument may suffer from this particular flaw. Again, my apologies, and I promise to be clearer in the future.
 * Second: Back to the topic at hand. I'm not going to rehash my previous arguments, at least not yet. What I want to do first is request clarification. You said: "All living creatures are born." Then you said: "It's something they do...." These two statements do not gel for me. The first seems to say that what matters is the trait of having been produced through birth, while the second suggests that what matters is the trait of being able to reproduce through birth. I am confused because these are actually two different characteristics. Which one are you espousing? Shenshema 09:38, June 1, 2010 (UTC)

But I never said that 'what matters is the trait of being able to reproduce through birth', or anything along those lines. You are taking what I said and seem to be misunderstanding it. When I said 'it's something they do', I was referring to the act of being born, not to the act of reproducing through birth (or live birth, or any other form). I was simply referring to the act of being born, as all living creatures are born (even clones like Dolly, and 'test-tube babies' are still born) as opposed to being created in a factory or a shipyard or any other pre-existing industrial facility. That's all. Again, the main crux of my argument is that if beings need a pre-existing industrial framework in order to reproduce, or propogate, or whatever you want to call it, they aren't living. The birth example was just supporting evidence for this argument. SpartHawg948 10:26, June 1, 2010 (UTC)