FANDOM


This is the talk page for Cipher.
Please limit discussions to topics that go into improving the article.
If you wish to discuss matters not relevant to article upkeep, take it to the blogs, forums,
Discord chat, or discussions module.
Thank you.

Trivia EditEdit

Commdor, why was a perfectly valid triva addition removed? SInce when has 'subjective' been a reason to undo trivia, especially in a case that is not subjective. As the trivia notes, the descriptions of the cipher and 'grok' are extremely similar and both are science fiction concept. That trivia is perfectly valid, and should not have been removed. JakePT 06:00, April 28, 2011 (UTC)

Similar, but in my opinion not close enough without direct dev confirmation that there is a link. The Cipher is more of an abstract construct, a singular defined entity, a noun. Stranger in a Strange Land's "grokking" is a process, a verb. To me, it's like saying a book = reading. I think comparing the two as a reference is subjective, just too much of a stretch to warrant mention as trivia. I won't oppose re-adding this if we can get solid confirmation from BioWare that the Cipher was based on/inspired by/a reference to "grok". -- Commdor (Talk) 06:18, April 28, 2011 (UTC)

Mass Effect: Genesis Edit

There should be a mention of the Cipher/Shiala being removed from the lore, as per the interactive Mass Effect: Genesis comic which removes Feros from the story.

ME: Genesis does not remove the events of Feros or anything else from the lore, it is not a retelling of ME. Genesis was originally designed by BioWare to act as a brief intro to the series for PS3 players, who cannot access ME themselves and carry over ME's decisions into ME2. As such, Genesis only examines the most important decision points of ME. Feros was left out (as well as all of the side missions) because there's no big decision there, not because it is no longer part of the lore. -- Commdor (Talk) 20:36, August 31, 2011 (UTC)
http://masseffect.wikia.com/wiki/Mass_Effect:_Genesis
"Notably, the mission on Feros is omitted entirely from the comic."
Would you prefer the word "omitted"? It is a retelling. Without the Cipher, Shepard would not have been able to assist Liara in determining how they knew to go to Ilos.
You're reading too much into it. Just because BioWare did not include a summary of the events on Feros in Genesis does not mean in any way that Feros is no longer part of ME lore. In fact, I'm pretty sure the ME2 assignment Illium: Medical Scans, which directly refers to Shepard's involvement on Feros, occurs even in games where Genesis was used. Genesis is not supposed to be a definitive, thorough summary of ME, it's only a tool for players to make ME's most important decisions without having to play ME. -- Commdor (Talk) 21:20, August 31, 2011 (UTC)
No, I'm really not "reading" into anything. Shiala isn't in the PS3 version of the game, and neither is Conrad.
But you're saying that just because Feros isn't in Genesis, it's no longer part of the ME universe for everyone who played ME and experienced it. This is a mistaken assumption. Anything that you can potentially do in ME and ME2 is part of the lore. If you choose not to do something, or cannot do something, then that event is only absent from the lore of that single playthrough of yours, not everyone else's.
As for Shiala and Conrad not appearing in the PS3 version of ME2, the same happens for 360 and PC ME players who don't spare Shiala on Feros or complete Conrad's assignment on the Citadel. Again, that only means that their related ME2 quests are absent in the universe of your playthrough, not everyone's. -- Commdor (Talk) 23:44, August 31, 2011 (UTC)
(edit conflict)Really? I've heard that both appear in the PS3 version. And even if they don't, then we have to default to the PC and Xbox 360 versions because of the import process being complete as the PS3 will never have Mass Effect, therefore some things in it are more problematic. I have to agree that mentioning that it is remove from lore flies in the face of canon. When issues like this come up, we have to side with the two versions that have the complete process and the complete story, and if that means we have to disregard things from the PS3 version that run counter to the PC and Xbox 360 versions, then so be it. The fact remains however that the Cipher is not removed from the lore, it is just not mentioned in Genesis for whatever reason. Genesis doesn't even come close to retelling Mass Effect, nor will it ever.
Either way, I also have to agree, you are reading way to much into it. You cannot retell a game that takes on average over 20 hours to play, and that's just doing the main story, not any side assignments. Mass Effect is a massive game and trying to put everything into a 15 minute summary just doens't work. Lancer1289 23:56, August 31, 2011 (UTC)
All these arguments are metagaming, and easily dismissed. The fact is they're not there, and Feros is removed. I'd love to see some evidence of Shiala, Conrad, Feros and the cipher in the PS3. (Doesn't Tali's romance have a line about what Shepard did on Feros? Doesn't Morinth make a mention of the cipher?) Regardless, what this means is in ME3 for PS3 owners, Shiala and Conrad won't be there, as will any relevance to Feros. Unless they have, yet again, another retcon or glitch.
How is this metagaming or retcon for that matter? Please explain that I'm serious. You aren't using external factors, you aren't modding the game, you aren't using out-of-game resources, or anything else that I can think of, or that's listed in the Wikipedia article on it. I should also mention that they cannot be easily dismissed, rather it is your argument that can be because it files in the face of canon. This isn't retcon or a glitch, it's fact. The cipher is and will always be part of the Mass Effect Universe and just because it isn't in one version of the game, doesn't instantly mean that it is retconed away. See what I said about the canon level of games above due to what happened with ME2. In situations where there is something omitted from the PS3 version, we have to side with the more accurate games, which are for the Xbox 360 and PC because they both had Mass Effect, they both have the import from Mass Effect, and they both will have the full import process into Mass Effect 3. You cannot dismiss anything and nor can we remove this article or mention that this is removed from the lore because that isn't what happened. Genesis is not a retelling of Mass Effect, nor could it have any hope of being that. Again expalin how you can completely retell a 20+ hour game in fifteen minutes? Fact, you can't and have no possible way of doing that. Can you completely retell a three hour movie in two minutes and fifteen seconds and get every detail? There is no possible way you can do that. The fact remains that Genesis is not a complete retelling of Mass Effect, nor will it ever be, and because of that, the information here isn't retconed, removed, or no longer part of the lore, it is most definitely part of the lore, most definitely part of the universe, and very important to the people who can play Mass Effect. Unless I imagined this when I played through it about two weeks ago.
Your argument here has absolutely no basis in fact and you honestly don't have a leg to stand on for this argument. I again say you are reading WAY too much into this and you need to take a step back, reanalyze the situation, and think about it for a minute. If something doesn’t agree with you, or you can't explain it, then you outright dismiss it. You dismiss our arguments without even trying to refute them, mainly because I don't think you can. You haven't even remotely tried to refute any argument we've had and I'd like to see you try. I'll bring some out, and in addition to trying to refute those, answer every question I've layed out in my comment, and I'll list those again as well.
  1. "Genesis only examines the most important decision points of ME" (attempt to refute)
  2. "Genesis is not supposed to be a definitive, thorough summary of ME, it's only a tool for players to make ME's most important decisions without having to play ME" (attempt to refute)
  3. "But you're saying that just because Feros isn't in Genesis, it's no longer part of the ME universe for everyone who played ME and experienced it" (attempt to refute)
  4. "Anything that you can potentially do in ME and ME2 is part of the lore" (attempt to refute)
  5. "If you choose not to do something, or cannot do something, then that event is only absent from the lore of that single playthrough of yours, not everyone else's" (attempt to refute)
  6. "Again, that only means that their related ME2 quests are absent in the universe of your playthrough, not everyone's" (attempt to refute)
  7. "I have to agree that mentioning that it is remove from lore flies in the face of canon" (attempt to refute)
  8. "When issues like this come up, we have to side with the two versions that have the complete process and the complete story, and if that means we have to disregard things from the PS3 version that run counter to the PC and Xbox 360 versions, then so be it" (attempt to refute)
  9. "The fact remains however that the Cipher is not removed from the lore, it is just not mentioned in Genesis for whatever reason. Genesis doesn't even come close to retelling Mass Effect, nor will it ever" (attempt to refute)
  10. "Mass Effect is a massive game and trying to put everything into a 15 minute summary just doesn’t work" (attempt to refute)
  11. "Again expalin how you can completely retell a 20+ hour game in fifteen minutes?" (answer)
  12. "Can you completely retell a three hour movie in two minutes and fifteen seconds and get every detail?" (answer)
I, again highly doubt that you will be able to refute anything above because you can't. The fact remians that since the PS3 version doesn't have an import from Mass Effect, only a very brief summary which doesn’t touch on every single detail of Mass Effect. There is no way that we can say that the Cipher doesn't exist, nor ever existed, we can't say that Conrad Verner isn't part of the universe anymore (if he really doesn’t appear), and the same goes for Shiala (if she really doesn’t appear). You again, don't have a leg to stand on here as you cannot dismiss or refute any argument because of not only the way Mass Effect is played and designed. The fact remains that the PS3 version doesn't have everything that the Xbox 360 and PC versions will, so when it comes to these situations, we cannot side with it because of the fact that an entire game is omitted from the series. This is as much part of the lore of Mass Effect as anything else from Mass Effect that doesn’t appear in the PS3 version. Lancer1289 13:59, September 1, 2011 (UTC)
Genesis omitted Feros. What's the result?
Shiala never existed. Shiala never gave Shepard the cipher. It simply wasn't in the narrative. To imply it is, is metagaming.
If ME3 is the same on XBOX 360, PC and PS3, as this article implies:
http://www.videogamer.com/ps3/mass_effect_3/news/mass_effect_3_on_ps3_and_xbox_360_are_indistinguishable.html
Shiala won't be in the PS3 version of ME3. Simple as that.
If she is, it'll be a retcon from the ME2 PS3 playthrough. Ditto with Conrad. If she isn't, than ME3 on PS3 will have obviously have missing content.
PS3 players (who obviously never played ME1), don't know about the cipher, Feros colonists, Thorian, etc.
If the cipher appears in the PS3 version of ME3, there will have to be some kind of backstory or exposition as to how Shepard got it, and the events of Feros, since, it never appeared in Genesis. This is all implying it has any relevance at all.
So that would be a no on answering any my questions and attempting to refute logical arguments then? I would also suggest reading that article a lot better because isn't saying what you think it is. The article states and I quote "So similar are the visuals of Mass Effect 3 on Xbox 360 and PlayStation 3, that BioWare marketing boss David Silverman believes gamers simply won't be able to spot any differences". "I don't think you'll see a difference between the Xbox version and the PS3 version. There's no drop in quality on either." That is talking about the graphics and visual quality, not the actual story of the game. The story of the game can differ from one playthrough to another. I know I have 36 of them and no two are the exact same. Close but not the same in a few cases. Just because Shiala isn't in one of my soldier playthroughs of Mass Effect 2, doesn’t mean she didn't exist because she did. Therefore, the article does nothing to help your position and only weakens it.
As one of the arguments you ignored above says "If you choose not to do something, or cannot do something, then that event is only absent from the lore of that single playthrough of yours, not everyone else's". That says everything right there. There are playthroughs of Mass Effect 2 that I have where Shiala doesn’t exist because I killed her. Or even a few that I stated in Mass Effect 2 where I used Genesis, or didn't, and she isn't present. Does that mean she never existed, no, it just means that she won't appear. It's not that she ever existed, she did that is an absolute fact, she didn't make it to 2185 for whatever reason. Just because something didn’t happen for you, doesn’t mean that it didn’t happen.
On Xbox and PC games, this means she was killed, and the same applies to the PS3 version. The fact remains that it isn't retcon, it isn't metagaming, it isn't anything because it existed, and there will be no changing that. You are arguing for us to ignore the experiences of Xbox and PC players to appease PS3 players, and that isn't how the system works. The fact of the matter is that the Xbox and PC versions will always be more correct than the PS3 versions because of the fact they have access to Mass Effect, they have a complete import process, and the PS3 version didn't have access to that. That doesn’t mean the events of Mass Effect, all the events, didn't happen, they just can't all be covered in a fifteen minute summary. There are hundreds of events that are covered in Mass Effect that aren't present in the PS3 version of ME2, but that doesn't mean they didn't happen, they are retconed, or that we should ignore them. They are all part of the Mass Effect universe. Just because something didn't happen in Genesis, doesn’t instantly mean that it is no longer canon, it didn't happen, or the entire event was retconed. Genesis is again a very brief summary to Mass Effect that doesn’t cover every event and only covers the major points of Mass Effect and the most critical decisions. But there are numerous decisions that aren’t covered, yet still happened, just not in your version/playthrough.
You again don't have any leg to stand on in this argument, and the fact that you ignored my request tells me something, that you are just here to argue and not attempt to try and refute the massive amount of evidence against you. You have ignored everything that was thrown at you because you say "if it didn't happen in the PS3 version, then it didn't happen and isn't canon". That is so blatantly incorrect, and the fact you can't see that, really disturbs me. I again ask you to answer my questions and attempt to refute my arguments above because ignoring them constantly tells me more than you think. Lancer1289 15:07, September 1, 2011 (UTC)
  • Addendum: I ask you to explain this sentence. "Shiala never existed. Shiala never gave Shepard the cipher. It simply wasn't in the narrative. To imply it is, is metagaming." What?! How does that even imply metagaming. There are so many issues with that statement that I don't think you can see them, nor will will see them any time soon. Shiala existed, gave Shepard the Cipher, and just because it wasn't covered in Genesis, doesn't mean it didn't happen. I should also point this out, if Shepard was never given the Cipher, whether or not it was covered in Genesis, then they would have never found Ilos, and would have never destroyed Sovereign. Vigil was also omitted from Genesis, but does that mean it never existed? No it doesn't. There are again a lot of events that aren't covered in Genesis and saying the didn't happen flies in the face of canon and ignores the simple fact that ME was never, nor will ever be, released on the PS3. Again, Genesis doesn't tell the entire story of Mass Effect, nor does it make an attempt to, so what you are saying is that we ignore events that happened in the Xbox and PC versions of Mass Effect because they weren't covered in a version that was released with a brief summary of the game? How does that make any sense? If say you didn't have access to say...oh...Harry Potter and the Sorcerer’s Stone, and the Chamber of Secrets only had a brief two page summary of what happened in the first book. Does that mean we can dismiss the first book and everything that isn't covered on those two pages? No it doesn't. I again tell you that you don't have a leg, or for that matter anything to stand on here. You want us to ignore canon and that isn't what we are going to do. Lancer1289 15:15, September 1, 2011 (UTC)
I'm not arguing. There's no need to. I'm stating fact.
The Cipher, Shiala, wasn't in Genesis. It wasn't in ME2 on PS3. It can have relevance in ME3, provided there's exposition of it in ME3. Or else PS3 players will have no idea where this came from/what's going on.
To imply it is, is only possible, if you've played ME2 elsewhere. That's metagaming. Shiala will never appear in ME2 on the PS3. Feros -- and all events thereof -- are not there. It has been omitted.
To imply it will have relevance in ME3 is anyone's guess. But it must be re-introduced. It can't be "remember when you went to Feros?" No, it has to be an entire re-telling of Feros, who Shiala is, what the Cipher is, etc., or it will just be a magical plot device from nowhere.
Whether we use the term removed or omitted, the issue is still the same. In ME3, Bioware has to re-introduce it into the narrative (if it has relevance), or neglect it entirely. It can be guaranteed that Shiala will not be in ME3, at least for PS3 owners. If she's in ME3 for all other owners, then there's obviously a difference in content: two versions of the narrative.
As the main article stands, it states that Shepard used the cipher to get to Ilos. This was not the case in Genesis.
You are arguing and you can't even see it! That's really disturbing. You are asking us to ignore canon just because something wasn't included in Genesis. That isn't right as you want us to dismiss an entire game just because you can't play it. It's a fact, Genesis is not a retelling of Mass Effect in any way. It is a summary, nothing more or less. Why can't you get this, it isn't that hard to comprehend? It is a brief summary of the game and doens't tell you everything that happened. The issue is not the same, the issue is completely different from what you think it is. Just because something isn't in Genesis, doesn’t mean that it was retconed, it was removed from canon, or anything of the sort. Shepard does use the Cipher to get to Ilos, however the comic doesn’t tell the entire story about it. Again, something you can't seem to comprehend, nor at this point do I have any hope that you will.
You keep claiming that it is metagaming and haven't, as of yet, provided one iota of evidence why it should be considered that. Genesis is nothing more than a VERY AND EXTREMELY BRIEF summary of ME and does not cover every detail of the 20+ hour game. How can it, it's physically impossible. There are lots of detail that get overlooked, characters get omitted, events aren't even mentioned, and things just aren't covered. You keep claiming that it is a retelling, and the fact remains that it isn't. The fact is that Genesis doesn't tell the entire story of Mass Effect and there are details about Virmire, Noveria, Therum, Eden Prime, and just about everything else that aren't told. Does that mean they didn't happen. For the last time, IT DOESN'T. Those events happened and there is no getting around that fact. That isn't metagaming, the events did happen, they just weren't covered in a tool used to educate PS3 people on the 6 Major Events of Mass Effect. Metagaming is using outside resources to influence decisions made in games. And this isn't that. It's just a detail that was omitted from the SUMMARY comic which only covers six events that have major decisions, for whatever reason, but that doesn't mean that it isn't canon. It is and there is no changing that.
"Whether we use the term removed or omitted, the issue is still the same". No it isn't. The issue now is that you are arguing for us to ignore canon and base everything off of a brief fifteen minute comic that doesn't tell the events of a 20+ hour game. I like the fact you so blatantly ignored my question so I'll ask it again. "Explain how you can completely retell a 20+ hour game in fifteen minutes?" If you cannot answer this question, then you don't have a case and I will not keep up this argument because you have ignored simple and polite requests for you to answer things, and you flat out ignore them and hide behind a wall that is nonexistent. You cannot possibly retell EVERY SINGLE DETAIL in fifteen minutes, it's impossible. The fact is that just because something wasn't mentioned in a brief summary of a 20+ hour game, doesn't mean it didn't happen.
"If she's in ME3 for all other owners, then there's obviously a difference in content: two versions of the narrative." Of course there are two versions, one that covers everything, which is Mass Effect, and one that only covers the major plot points. Using this method, BioWare had to leave out details and this was chosen for whatever reason. You can't ignore canon because something wasn't covered in a very brief summary of the first game. The events on Feros are not retconed or omitted from canon, they just aren't covered for whatever reason in Genesis. That doesn't not make Genesis more canon than the full game, it's less. On a scale of one to five, with five being absolute canon in terms of events, Mass Effect is a five, while Genesis is more like a two, maybe even a one. This is because it doesn't cover everything and leaves out details for whatever reason. You again just site that it's metagaming, and ignore everything else. Yet as pointed out earlier it isn't metagaming, it's just left out of Genesis.
I again point to my statement above that the Xbox and PC versions are more canon than the PS3 version. Again using that scale, the Xbox and PC versions are a five, while the PS3 comes in a three, possibly a four. When details come into conflict on the PS3 version, then we have to default to the Xbox and PC versions because everything is there. This is because we know that the PS3 doesn’t cover everything and yet the details are still canon. If we used Genesis as the ultimate canon, then we can throw out about half the content here as "it didn't happen". That is a problem because it did happen and they are canon. Stop trying to argue that just because it isn't covered in Genesis, it didn't happen because that isn't fact. Maybe in your fantasy universe it is, but not in reality where more people have access to the full games than the PS3. We aren't going to ignore things because they were left out of a summary comic. That is just flat out wrong and disenfranchises players. This article is here to fill in PS3 players on a detail that they missed because they don't have access to Mass Effect.
I again will ask you to answer my questions and try to refute the arguments above. If you cannot, then I will not respond, except to ask you again to answer all of my questions and refute the evidence above, which is up to about 16 now. If you ignore it again, you tell me that you don't care about the facts of the case, you just care about getting what you want and blissfully ignore the facts of what is really going on in this instance. That's the truth, not what you claim. Lancer1289 16:24, September 1, 2011 (UTC)
I don't argue with facts.
It doesn't matter if Genesis was a summary. PS3 owners have no knowledge of ME1 outside of Genesis. Thus, unless specifically stated in ME2 or ME3, those events never happened.
This implies if anything Feros related happens, it needs appropriate exposition on ME3.
All I want is for the entry under Cipher here to show that there's a difference between the PS3 ME2 and others, since Genesis tells the story differently as to how Shepard arrived on Ilos (as opposed to it's description of Shepard being able to understand Prothean, which clearly did not happen in Genesis. Shepard, in Genesis, only has the beacon vision.)
"Thus, unless specifically stated in ME2 or ME3, those events never happened". That is a false statment, you are aruging against facts, and you don't see it. The article will not ignore canon events for a summary. Also please stop ignoring my requests answer my questions and attempt to refute evidence above. Lancer1289 16:49, September 1, 2011 (UTC)
Sorry, but I do not see how that statement is false. PS3 owners have no knowledge of such events.
This article will not ignore canon events for a summary. The events on Feros happened, that is a fact, and claiming that they didn't is a false statement. Just because you didn't see something happen, doesn’t mean it didn't. In addition, please stop ignoring my requests answer my questions and attempt to refute evidence above. Lancer1289 16:57, September 1, 2011 (UTC)
But the events didn't. They weren't in the narrative. That's the fact. Now, because we metagame, we know they were. However, ME3 on PS3 will have to re-introduce Feros in some way, or yes, in fact, those events, never happened.
I am not interested in arguing. Just the facts. The lore was removed, as per the narrative. There should be a Trivia or ME: Genesis part on all things Feros related in the wiki.
You are ignoring facts, making false statements, and ignoring canon. Just because you didn't see something happen or it isn't mentioned in a SUMMARIZATION of a game, doesn’t mean it didn't. This is NOT METAGAMING, IT. IS. FACT. Feros happened, and just because it wasn't mentioned, doesn't mean we can ignore those events. WHY CAN'T YOU UNDERSTAND THAT? Those events happened, and you claim that Genesis is a narrative is false. It is a very brief and short summary of Mass Effect. IT DOESN'T TELL THE WHOLE STORY. There are events that are left out, there are events that aren't mentioned, but does that mean they didn't happen? NO IT DOSEN'T. Nothing was removed from canon, nothing was retconed, nothing changed. It just wasn't covered for whatever reason. Just because something isn't mentioned in Genesis, doesn't mean that it is no longer canon and that it didn't happen. There will be no alterations, no trivia mention, and this entire statement ("However, ME3 on PS3 will have to re-introduce Feros in some way, or yes, in fact, those events, never happened"), honestly shows how diluted on this issue you are.
You claim you are only interested in the facts, and you ignore them, make false statements, and ask us to ignore canon. That’s being a hypocrite to the extreme. The PS3 version of the game is not more canon than the Xbox 360 and PC versions, it is actually less because you cannot get things on it. You demand that we ignore canon and that we ignore events that are part of the Universe to suit you, and that isn't going to happen. The events of Mass Effect are canon and they will always be canon. Genesis DOES NOT IN ANYWAY OVERRIDE THE EVENTS OF MASS EFFECT, IT SUMMARIZES THEM. This seems to be a fact you cannot grasp and the more you argue it, the more it shows that you ignore facts. No article on this wiki will ignore canon and will not ignore what happened in Mass Effect because a tool that was provided to help PS3 players catch up on the major events, while leaving some details out.
You keep claiming that it is metagaming and I again ask you to look up the definition of it. It isn't metagaming, because the events described in this article are fact and canon. Genesis doesn't override Mass Effect, nor will it ever. To conclude, for the last and final time, just because something isn't mentioned in Genesis, doesn't mean that it is no longer canon and that it didn't happen. That is what you are ignoring. Genesis summarizes, (KEY WORD SUMMARIZES), Mass Effect. It doesn’t override the any events nor, just because it doesn’t cover something, doesn’t mean that it didn’t happen. That is the facts of this case, and your refusal to see them is showing how diluted you are. Lancer1289 17:24, September 1, 2011 (UTC)
Did Genesis summarize Feros? No. It omitted Feros. That is the main fact, and all subsequent lore and narrative of Feros was removed. It doesn't matter that you or I played ME1 on XBOX or PC. All that matters is the narrative on PS3. Why? Because that's all PS3 owners know about it. You simply have to take the perspective of the PS3 player, and feign ignorance of your knowledge of ME1. As such, the view of Shepard, and the events of the first ME1, are completely different. The wiki should reflect that (in all things Feros.)Smudboy 17:29, September 1, 2011 (UTC)
So basically if it isn't in Genesis, then it didn't happen right? WRONG. WRONG, WRONG, WRONG, WRONG WRONG. That is so incorrect I can't even describe how incorrect it is. You want us to rewirte this wiki based soely from the prespective of the PS3 version of Mass Effect 2. Well what about Mass Effect, do we just ignore the fact it was made? NO WE DON'T. Flash news, that isn't going to happen because it ignores so much canon that is isn't even funny. If we did that, then we might as well again ignore the fact Mass Effect was even made, and that's not funny either, nor it is an option, or even worth thinking about. The fact remains you want us to ignore canon, ignore facts, ignore a lot just to satisfy you. And that isn't going to happen. This wiki is about Mass Effect, and everything related to it. That includes Mass Effect, and Genesis doesn't replace it. It SUMMARIZES, Mass Effect, it doesn't in any sense of the word replace the events that happened there. Just because it wasn't covered in Genesis, doesn't mean that it is retconed, no longer canon, or part of the lore. It is canon, part of the lore, and just as relevant as anything in Mass Effect 2.
You claim all that matters is the SUMMARIZATION on the PS3, it isn't a narrative, and again that isn't the case. What matters is the entire Mass Effect series as a whole. This means every book, comic, game, DLC, and anything else I forgot. Just because a PS3 player doesn’t have access to Mass Effect, doesn’t mean that we should ignore the events that happened there. They are just as much canon as anything else. The view that PS3 players get is incomplete due to the fact Mass Effect will more than likely never be released on the PS3, but that in no way says that Mass Effect never happened. It started the game trilogy and it is as muc part of it as Mass Effect 2. Genesis summarizes the main plot of Mass Effect, but even then, details are left out for whatever reason. PS3 players can come here to learn what they missed in Mass Effect, and read about things they won't experiences not because they aren't canon, but because Mass Effect will never be release3d on the PS3. I don't have to "feign ignorance" of Mass Effect, because if I do, then I ignore so much canon, that it isn't funny. Genesis is not a replacement for Mass Effect and doesn’t tell the whole story. It briefly SUMMARIZES the plot and just because it doesn't cover it, doesn't mean it didn't happen or that it isn’t' still part of the lore or canon.
And what about all of the Xbox players who started this wiki and the PC players who joined up after it was released on the PC? Do we just ignore what we experienced with the game? Did we all just dream up the events of Bring Down the Sky? Or Pinnacle Station Or the Mako? Or Engineer Adams? No we didn't. Everything that I mentioned isn't mentioned in Genesis, but yet they are all part of the Universe, and are canon. Doing what you ask dumbs down the wiki and throws canon out the window. That isn't an option, why can't you get that? Mentioning that anything that wasn't mentioned in Genesis is no longer canon flies in the face of it. Feros is still a planet in Mass Effect, the events there still happened, you still had to deal with Captain Ventralis on Noveria, he isn't mentioned either FYI, and Genesis is in no way canceling out Mass Effect, nor does it say that anything that wasn't covered by it, is retconed. By that thinking, only six events took place in Mass Effect, and that isn't the case. You are no longer arguing facts, you want your way and you don't care what has to happen to get it. Lancer1289 18:18, September 1, 2011 (UTC)
According to the PS3 ME2 player, it didn't happen.Smudboy 18:21, September 1, 2011 (UTC)
I'm not asking to delete parts of the wiki. I'm asking to add parts to it.Smudboy 18:22, September 1, 2011 (UTC)

That's it. I'm done arguing this ridiculous issue. I will not respond anymore to this issue again if my questions, which I will pose at the end of this comment, are not all answered.

They say the truth hurts, which is a fact, so I will speek candidly and honestly. It is blatantly obvious to me that you, Smudboy, are reading way too much into this issue , you can't see how diluted you are, and you’ve lost all perspective on this issue. You want your way and what us to adapt the Mass Effect Universe to suit you and from your perspective, while ignoring everyone else. You don't care what we have to do, ignore canon, ignore facts, ignore consoles, ignore events, ignore people's experiences, as long as you get your way, that's all you care about. The fact remains that Mass Effect: Genesis SUMMARIZES the events of Mass Effect, IT DOESN'T REPLACE THEM. If something isn't mentioned, it doesn’t mean that they didn't happen. They just weren't mentioned for whatever reason. That doesn’t mean they didn't happen, they still happened and they are still part of this universe. What is really being asked is that we rewrite this wiki from the perspective of a player that has just picked up Mass Effect 2 on the PS3, while ignoring Xbox and PC players. Genesis doesn't remotely begin to cover all the events of Mass Effect, and therefore, just because it isn't mentioned, doesn’t mean it never happened, because it did.

You claim to want us to add things, yet by doing that, you want us to ignore canon, events, experiences, and anything else I mentioned earlier. We can't do that, the events that take place in mass Effect are as canon, and probably more canon, than the events that take place in the Mass Effect 2 PS3 version, which has things removed for whatever reason. Mass Effect is a part of this series as Mass Effect 2 and the fact remains that Genesis doesn’t override the events of Mass Effect, it provides a very brief summary of the major events, and even then leaves things out. This article, along with every other one I've mentioned, are canon and are still part of the lore and the Mass Effect Universe. Mass Effect is a series, and because the PS3 comes into the series in the middle, there are of course things that are going to be missing for whatever reason. That doesn’t mean they are no longer canon, they are still canon and still part of this Universe and this series.

Here are the facts of this case:

  • Fact: Any character that only appears in Mass Effect is still as much part of this universe as any character in the PS3 version of ME2.
  • Fact: Mass Effect: Genesis doesn’t cover every detail of Mass Effect. But that doesn't mean that anything that isn't covered isn't canon or part of the lore. They all are.
  • Fact: What is being asked is that we ignore the events of Mass Effect and only reflect the events of Mass Effect: Genesis and Mass Effect 2 as canon. While tossing everything about the lore and canon, characters, events, etc., out the window in the process.
  • Fact: This asks us to ignore the Xbox and PC entirely actually. The events they experience are no longer part of the lore, they are just interesting and no longer canon or lore. Sorry people, you wasted all of that time.
  • Fact: We are being asked to add things, but those things ignore the canon, continuity, and lore of the Mass Effect series. We are being asked to ignore Mass Effect and replace it with Genesis and anything that isn't mentioned in Genesis, didn't happen and isn't canon.
  • Fact: We are being asked to rewrite the wiki to reflect experiences that can only be obtained from the PS3 version and from Genesis, while ignoring the Xbox and PC versions and Mass Effect as a whole.
  • Fact: We are being asked to put notes in articles that only concern the events of Mass Effect that effectively state "The events in this article are no longer consered canon because Mass Effect: Genesis doesn’t cover this issue and is higher on the canon scale than Mass Effect". Need I point out how incorrect that is?
  • I'm sure there are more, but I can't think of any at the moment.

Now here are the questions I want ansered?

  1. Are characters like Adams no longer part of the Mass Effect Universe, no longer canon, and no longer part of the Lore? And if not, then why?
  2. What about events and planets that are only covered in Mass Effect? Are they no longer canon? If not, then why?
  3. What about the experiences of the characters in Mass Effect? Are they no longer relevant? Are those events no longer canon? If not, then why? Examples are giving Tali the geth data during the Tali and the Geth assignment.
  4. What about the experiences of the players on the PC and Xbox who do experience those events? Did we all just dream them up? Why are those events no longer canon or part of the lore?
  5. Why should we rewrite and add things to this wiki saying that "the events of this article are no longer part of the Mass Effect Universe" despite the fact they happened?
  6. Why should we only take events that happened in Genesis as the ultimate canon, while we ignore the events of Mass Effect, which is a 20+ hour game? Genesis doesn't cover every detail in Mass Effect, it doesn’t even come close, so why should we ignore those events?
  7. Why should we cater to PS3 players at the expense of PC and Xbox 360 players? PS3 players don't have the whole story, so why should we leave events out? Why not just document them from Mass Effect, and allow them to read up on what they missed?
  8. Since Mass Effect is a series, a planned trilogy actually, and last time I checked two games isn't a trilogy, which is what will be released on the PS3. Why should we only take the events of a brief summary of a game for people entering in the second game as more canon than the events of the first game and those who have access to the full series as it was planned? And disenfranchise those players by doing so? (If this question isn't answered, even if every other one is, I will not respond.)
  9. Relating to an earlier example, if you didn't have access to say Harry Potter and the Sorcerer's Stone, and only had access to a brief two page summary before reading Harry Potter and the Chamber of Secrets, are only the events cataloged in those two pages canon? And if something isn't mentioned, then it is no longer considered canon? (While it is somewhat modified, this is the real basis of what is being argued here and if this isn't responded to, I also will not respond.)

If those questions are not answered with logical, objective, and valid reasons in a response, then as I stated, I will not respond. Also if the only response is "Well they aren't in the PS3 version or covered in Genesis" then I also will not respond as that isn't an answer, that is another way of avoid the question. I want honest, thought out answers as to why we should no longer consider the events of Mass Effect canon and part of the lore, and only consider the event of Genesis, which doesn’t even remotely being to cover everything in Mass Effect, canon and part of the lore over that. Until these are answered, I will not argue this issue further as I feel that the facts of this case are being ignored and one party is not considering what are the ramifications of what they propose. Lancer1289 19:23, September 1, 2011 (UTC)

So you don't want to add to the page that the cipher wasn't mentioned in Genesis?Smudboy 19:36, September 1, 2011 (UTC)
Whether or not the Cipher was mentioned in Genesis is irrelevant to the Cipher itself. We have the article for ME: Genesis to explain what Genesis contains. That's the more appropriate venue for this, not here. -- Commdor (Talk) 19:45, September 1, 2011 (UTC)
Considering the cipher is integral to the story of ME1, and not in Genesis, it would be informative to point out that difference.Smudboy 19:47, September 1, 2011 (UTC)

Before we go any further, as you have apparently played the PS3 version of ME2, answer me this: is Illium: Medical Scans in the PS3 version of ME2 at all? It doesn't matter if Shiala is the one who gives the assignment, there should be a generic human colonist from Feros there to fill that role if Shiala did not survive the events of Feros (which occurs by player choice, or by default if no ME file is imported to ME2, and, I'm willing to bet, with using Genesis regardless of platform). If the assignment is in the PS3 version of ME2 in any form, that irrefutably proves that the events of Feros (including the Cipher) did happen regardless of whether or not you personally experienced them, and renders this whole discussion moot. -- Commdor (Talk) 20:35, September 1, 2011 (UTC)

Some Zhu's hope person is there. Neither Shiala or Gianna are around. Regardless, it still doesn't refer to the cipher being relevant: it doesn't exist in the PS3 narrative. Just because you or I know it was in ME1, doesn't mean it exists in the PS3 narrative; which obviously changes how Shepard got to Ilos. Smudboy 20:56, September 1, 2011 (UTC)
That's where you're wrong. It is impossible to complete the Feros mission without Shepard receiving the Cipher, and it is impossible to complete ME without completing Feros. Therefore, in any ME universe where Feros happened, (which is all universes; you just proved my point that Feros happens even if you use Genesis), Shepard receives the Cipher. And therefore, the Cipher exists in all ME universes. Furthermore, you have no evidence whatsoever that Shepard finds Ilos through alternate means if you use Genesis, nothing which contradicts the absolute necessity of the Cipher. It's groundless speculation. -- Commdor (Talk) 21:15, September 1, 2011 (UTC)
No, that's where you're wrong. The PS3 user, who has no knowledge of ME1, has no knowledge of Shiala or the Cipher. You're metagaming. You have to take the perspective of the ignorant gamer who's never touched or known anything about the Mass Effect games. Once you do that, you cannot make your argument: because you have no knowledge of it.
Genesis does not make mention of the cipher, yet, Shepard still gets to Ilos.70.49.96.52 22:55, September 1, 2011 (UTC)

No, Commdor is correct here. As is Lancer. Genesis does not remove the Cipher from the lore. Nor does it somehow render the Cipher nonexistent in the PS3 version. As Commdor points out, it's impossible for Shepard to get to Ilos without the Cipher. There were plenty of things not touched upon in Genesis. Does that mean that, somehow, all those things cease to exist. or that they are somehow "removed from the lore"? Of course not. SpartHawg948 23:11, September 1, 2011 (UTC)

At the risk of belaboring the point and/or feeding a troll, why is the universe available to the PS3 player constrained to ME2 and the Genesis comic? Are we supposed to assume that the average PS3 player is simple? That they are incapable of understanding that the '2' at the end of the title 'Mass Effect 2' implies that this is indeed a sequel to a previously released game, and that events may have happened in that previously released game? I know some die-hard PS3 owners that would like to talk to you... -- Dammej (talk) 01:00, September 2, 2011 (UTC)

Why the hell did they include pseudoscientific garbage like this into the game? The game is harder science fiction then this! Everyone and their mum should know that Jung's theories were just baseless speculation he pulled out of thin air. (Unsigned by http://masseffect.wikia.com/wiki/Special:Contributions/68.12.196.239)

You could try asking this in the Watercooler Forum. The talk page of an article is for querying the article content, not game content. -Sophia (talk) 21:42, March 18, 2015 (UTC)
Community content is available under CC-BY-SA unless otherwise noted.