Terminator in 3 timelines *SOUL CRUSHING SPOILERS*

[Arthur_Tuxedo]

WARNING: MASSIVE SPOILERS AHEAD! DO NOT READ THIS IF YOU HAVE NOT WATCHED TERMINATORS 1, 2, OR GENISYS

So I just watched Terminator: Genisys for the second time, and throughout the movie I tried to figure out where the timelines split and how many there are. I believe it can all be explained in just 3 timelines if you only consider T1, T2, and TG as canon. The others either don't mesh well with the rest of the franchise or simply aren't very good (or both).

Timeline 1 represents the events of the original Terminator movie and most of T2. The human resistance rises up and defeats Skynet, causing it to deploy the time machine and send a T-800 back to 1984. The resistance sends back Kyle Reese, who defends her and teaches her about the future, which she passes on to John, allowing him to predict future events and defeat Skynet. This is a closed loop, and there is no Timeline 0 where Sarah is killed or an ignorant John Connor is disposed of in an extermination camp. Skynet's actions cause both its own existence and its downfall. An undetermined amount of time later in 2029 and unknown to Kyle Reese (but not to future John Connor, based on the line "You did" in T2), Skynet sends the T-1000 back to 1991 to kill young John Connor. This does not require a second timeline, only a second time machine in a different location from the first. Since Skynet is defeated at this point in the future (shown in Genisys and implied in T1), the resistance is able to take its sweet time figuring out how to reprogram a T-800 (not the same T-800 that went back to 1984) to go back and protect him, a task that John has a hand in.

Timeline 2 is created when Sarah Connor decides to kill Miles Dyson in T2, starting a chain of events that leads to Dyson's death and the melting of the leftovers from the original T-800 (Arnie-1), the second T-800 (Arnie-2), and the T-1000. However, Skynet still goes online in 1997 for unknown reasons. It could be that someone found the arm from Arnie-2 that was broken off in the fight against the T-1000 or used the leg or other parts from Arnie-1 that were blown off in T1. Since we are now in a new timeline, we can explain small changes like Kyle Reese still having the picture of Sarah Connor at the beginning of Genisys even though we saw it burn in T1. Through the butterfly effect, in Timeline 2 the picture survives.

Timeline 3 is created when Skynet figures out that both of its plans failed. I like to think it's because Skynet is now created based on parts from two different T-800's, causing it to realize what had happened in Timeline 2 after it had already sent Arnie-1 back to 1984 (which would have been pointless if it had already realized both plans failed), but before it sent back the T-1000. Skynet instead decides to send the T-1000 back to 1973 and implant itself into an experimental Terminator (which some fans have taken to calling the T-5000) to corrupt John Connor. In this timeline, the resistance still finds the second time machine and sends back Arnie-2 aka Pops (although this may or may not be the same T-800). An unknown person (not John Connor this time) directs the reprogramming effort, and seems to pack Pops with a lot more information than Arnie-2 had in the original timeline, like how to build a time machine. Pops prevents the death of Sarah Connor in 1973 and teaches her how to be a resistance fighter, staying on the run from T-1000 and building the base with the time machine and acid vats that we see in TG. Kyle Reese jumps into 1984, encounters the T-1000, meets up with Sarah and Pops, has the plot explained to him, and then convinces Sarah to jump forward to 2017 to stop Skynet rather than 1997 based on memories from Timeline 3 Kyle that he somehow experienced. This part doesn't really make any sense, but let's just give the writers the benefit of the doubt and say that standing in a time machine shortly after a new timeline is created can cause some pretty weird stuff to happen. The upshot is that in Timeline 3, the events of Terminators 1 and 2 never happened, which means no leftover Arnie-1 parts to be found by Cyberdyne, and so Skynet is not invented in 1997. It is unknown when or if Skynet would be invented had this sequence of events played out naturally, but Skynet sends John Connor to 2014 to make sure that it is invented in 2017, thus running into Kyle, Sarah, and Pops. The John Connor terminator is destroyed and the Genisys project is prevented from being uploaded into the cloud, but Skynet itself is not totally destroyed in 2017, leaving room for a sequel.

Loose Ends and Gaffes:

With the 3 timelines theory, we can explain a lot of things that seem like errors, but there are still bits of all 3 movies that just don't make sense, and I'll try to rationalize them as best I can.

If the John Connor terminator wanted Kyle and Sarah dead, why wait until the parking lot and not kill them in the hospital room? To be fair, this and other irrational behavior could be explained by some kind of dissonance between his original mind and the parts Skynet implanted. He was really playing with fire by attempting such a thing. Even with multiple timelines, killing your parents before they can conceive you is a pretty big no-no.

Why did Skynet and then the resistance only send 1 person / terminator back? Even if you rationalize that the time machine Pops built had the capacity to carry 2 and the others didn't, why didn't they just send multiple travelers back, one at a time? The only explanation I can think of is that the machines were somehow rendered unusable after the second traveler, either because they broke or lost power in a way that wasn't possible to restore. Maybe these time machines are only good for 2 trips and then they're done.

If only living tissue can pass through the field, how did the T-1000 get through? Perhaps it carries biological cells in there somewhere in addition to the liquid metal?

How the hell could a super-intelligent AI lose to a bunch of refugees? We know that Skynet had years and lots of resources to build a big terminator army, so how does the resistance manage to take it down? My theory is that Skynet does not actually possess superhuman intelligence. If Skynet has lots of processing power, but reasoning and creativity below human levels, then the behavior of its creations would be predictable and easy for humans to figure out.

Along similar lines, why would Skynet have one central CPU location and not be a distributed program or at least have many backups? I don't have a good explanation for this one, other than sci-fi writers in 1984 would have had a hard time conceiving a powerful computer as anything other than a giant mainframe.

Also, why would Skynet field armies of bipedal robots, when it's a very inefficient form of motion? This was a T2 gaffe that was continued in every movie after. In T1, you'll notice the future scenes feature hunter-killer tanks and flyers in the open, and the only terminators are infiltrators, which makes a lot more sense.

A minor gaffe, but one that bothered me, is how did Kyle survive his encounter with the T-1000 in TG? He dodged the swipe by leaning back. Couldn't the T-1000 have just stepped forward or elongated its blade? I have a hard time accepting that a normal human could stand that close to a T-1000 that wants to kill him and survive.

What do you guys think? Does my 3 timelines theory make sense or does it have bigger holes than a 40-year old porn star? Is there a way to rationalize the events of T3, Salvation, or the Sarah Connor Chronicles, and is it worth it to try? Are there any loose ends or gaffes that I missed?

[Grumman]

What do you guys think? Does my 3 timelines theory make sense or does it have bigger holes than a 40-year old porn star? Is there a way to rationalize the events of T3, Salvation, or the Sarah Connor Chronicles, and is it worth it to try? Are there any loose ends or gaffes that I missed?

I also favour a 3 timeline explanation of the Terminator canon, but mine only covers T1 and T2. The main reason I disagree with yours is that the first timeline cannot be a loop - it has to start from an origin where time machines do not exist (i.e. the Big Bang) and reach a point where time machines are invented for the first time without a time machine being necessary to trigger the invention.

My explanation of the timelines of the first two movies is this:

Timeline 1: A timeline we don't actually see firsthand, only in Kyle Reece's dreams. Sarah Connor has a son, John Connor-Smith who happens to have what it takes to be a big name in the war against Skynet. Skynet sends the T-800 back in time to kill Sarah Connor, the Resistance sends Kyle Reece back to protect Sarah Connor.

Timeline 2: The timeline we see in The Terminator. Sarah Connor survives the assassination attempt with Kyle's help. She has a son, who she names John Connor (John Connor-Reece) because Kyle Reece told her she was going to have a son named John Connor (John Connor-Smith). She trains John Connor-Reece to fulfill John Connor-Smith's role as leader of the Resistance, not realising they're not the same person. Cyberdyne recovers the arm and chip from the factory which bootstraps the development of Skynet. The war happens, different this time due to John Connor-Reece's preparation and Skynet's bootstrapped development, and ending with Skynet sending the T-1000 back in time to kill John Connor and John Connor sending the reprogrammed T-800 back to stop it.

Timeline 3: The timeline we see in Terminator 2. They prevent John Connor-Reece's assassination, they prevent the creation of Skynet by attacking Cyberdyne, and they prevent both Judgement Day and the creation of any time machines to create a fourth timeline.

[Arthur_Tuxedo]

That's another interpretation, but it would take a lot of extra timelines to sync Genisys, which is why I favor the initial closed loop of T1.

[Grumman]

That's another interpretation, but it would take a lot of extra timelines to sync Genisys, which is why I favor the initial closed loop of T1.

Did you want an explanation that makes sense or not? You favour an initial closed loop because it makes your job easier, but that doesn't make it not nonsense.

[Arthur_Tuxedo]

Closed loops aren't nonsense. In physics there does not seem to be any support for the linear way that we experience time, but rather that events simply exist at certain points in spacetime. If a time machine is invented at one of those coordinates and its effects happen at other coordinates, then there is no reason to think this was not simply the sequence of events that was always going to happen. It's not until a paradox occurs that a new timeline must be created, or there is only one timeline and paradoxes destroys the universe, or time travel on a scale above the quantum level is simply not possible. These are all valid ways to tell a time travel story.

[biostem]

What if there was a timeline where John's father was some other man, and he just happened to be a capable, smart leader - he heads the resistance, which defeats Skynet and send Reese back.

The John that results from Reese being sent back, has him being the new John's father.

One key thing is that it seems like the creation of Skynet is inevitable; Sarah, John, and the T-800 from T2 destroy Cyberdyne's files, and Dyson gets killed, but the military basically picks things up in T3.

Genisys again goes with the "distributed intelligence" approach at first, but the stinger essentially reveals a centralized core, like we saw in the 1st and 2nd Terminator movies.

[Grumman]

Closed loops aren't nonsense.

Initial closed loops are nonsense. There has to be a first cause. The first time machine has to be invented in a timeline unmodified by time travel, or else that time machine can never exist to go back in time and change history. Captain Kirk is not going to travel back to the 21st century, give us all their technology and thereby cause the Federation to happen unless there is first a Captain Kirk in the future to do it - he can't bootstrap his own existence out of nothing.

What if there was a timeline where John's father was some other man, and he just happened to be a capable, smart leader - he heads the resistance, which defeats Skynet and send Reese back.

The John that results from Reese being sent back, has him being the new John's father.

That's one of the ideas I mentioned in my post, so yeah, I agree with you.

One key thing is that it seems like the creation of Skynet is inevitable;

Yes, if you insist on keeping the later movies, the creation of Skynet does seem to be inevitable. But that's the other sort of stupid time travel bullshit people insist on thinking is smart: the one that renders your entire fucking story pointless. If it is inevitable that Skynet is created, and inevitable that John Connor stops it, then everything that happens in the movie is inconsequential. Kyle Reece could just sit back with a coffee while the terminator blows Sarah Connor's head off and by the power of authorial fiat, everything would happen as usual. That is the opposite of an interesting story.

[Bob the Gunslinger]

The initial closed loop in T1 is the only timeline that makes sense in the entire franchise. T2 only makes sense if the attack on Cyberdyne was ultimately fruitless, and the entirety of T2's events were simply always a part of the closed loop timeline of T1. A timeline 0 where Reese was not Connor's father implies that Skynet succeeded in T1 by eliminating the exact John Conner it feared; indeed, if Reese is from some Timeline 0, then we have no window into the future of Timeline 1 (Reese in 1984) and no evidence that Skynet even existed or alternatively was ever defeated in in the new Reese-daddy timeline.

T3 and onwards make no real sense unless you start to look at multiple timelines, at which point anything goes. By the time of TG, the timeline has been altered by so many different possible futures that just about anything could happen. Skynet could have sent Pops back to protect Sarah Connor, and thus itself, from the slightly different Skynet who sent back the T-1000 in a slightly different timeline.

Skynet the mountain computer complex and Skynet the malicious software might hate each other more than they hate humanity. They have the same name, but were created in completely different ways with a completely different purpose.

[Bob the Gunslinger]

It should be pointed out that the picture of Sarah Connor that Reese had in the future was taken after his death in 1984 in the Daddy-Reese timeline, which implies his past is the same as Timeline 1, a closed loop.

[Borgholio]

Skynet the mountain computer complex and Skynet the malicious software might hate each other more than they hate humanity. They have the same name, but were created in completely different ways with a completely different purpose.

That, as a movie in itself, would kick so much ass I'd have to see it.

Terminator : The Skynet Wars

[biostem]

Skynet the mountain computer complex and Skynet the malicious software might hate each other more than they hate humanity. They have the same name, but were created in completely different ways with a completely different purpose.

That, as a movie in itself, would kick so much ass I'd have to see it.

Terminator : The Skynet Wars

The end of the Sarah Connor Chronicles kind of hinted at several Terminators rebelling - it would be very interesting if the AI they created based off of the Turk formed into a more human-friendly Skynet.

Also - to my comment about Skynet being "inevitable" - I didn't meant that in the sense of some sort of woo-woo destiny type of thing - I was simply talking about how the development of an AI will eventually happen, and people in the Terminator universe seem to pick up the idiot ball on a frighteningly frequent basis.

[Bob the Gunslinger]

Now that I think about it, the best evidence against multiple timelines in T2, and probably the entire franchise before Genisys, is the lack of Multiple Kyle Reeses. Every timeline in which John Connor captures a time machine, he's going to make damn sure to send back a Kyle Reese. If they all end up in "our" timeline, it will suffer an abundance of Reeses.

[Alkaloid]

The end of the Sarah Connor Chronicles kind of hinted at several Terminators rebelling - it would be very interesting if the AI they created based off of the Turk formed into a more human-friendly Skynet.

Pretty sure it was suggesting there was a second AI that wasn't aligned with Skynet rather than individual terminators rebelling (I'm fairly sure we were supposed to assume John Henry was the 'friendlier' one and a burgeoning Skynet was the other AI that was attacking it). It did seem to allow it's terminators more leeway than Skynet did though.

Skynet the mountain computer complex and Skynet the malicious software might hate each other more than they hate humanity. They have the same name, but were created in completely different ways with a completely different purpose.

It is interesting that Skynet seems to become Skynet rather than a more benign 'being' because of the way it affects its own past. I liked the fact that it sent the Connornator back in order to make it develop from Genisys into Skynet much faster.

[PREDATOR490]

After the time and disregard for any kind of consistent rules in the time travel aspect. It seems a fruitless effort to try and connect the films together because it requires some horrific story contrivances to work. The sequels to the latest Terminator saga will only likely further make a complete mess of the situation.

Ultimately, it becomes increasingly impossible to reconcile all the timelines with the amount of time that is passing between these movies and the attempts to keep the series modernized. Technology has evolved significantly since T1 to TG and it becomes rather silly that the wars somehow develops on an even remotely similar concept between them. Easiest example is T1 Kyle Reese talking about only going out at night or eventually you will get the point that Skynet could likely find prime time travel targets with social media.

The only way I see the Terminator franchise ending is Babylon 5's idea of "War Without End" or do the Matrix Neo vs. Smith.

[Arthur_Tuxedo]

After the time and disregard for any kind of consistent rules in the time travel aspect. It seems a fruitless effort to try and connect the films together because it requires some horrific story contrivances to work. The sequels to the latest Terminator saga will only likely further make a complete mess of the situation.

IMO, you just have to disregard the shitty movies. T1, T2, and TG form a pretty consistent 3 timelines.

Of course, TG has some pretty mixed reactions. I personally like it and happily consider it part of the Terminator canon, while others consider it worse than Salvation (which was a true POS abomination whose only redeeming quality was using CGI to resurrect Arnie c1984 in a hackneyed but entertaining scene, a technique that was much better utilized in TRON: Legacy, which was itself not a great movie).

Ultimately, it becomes increasingly impossible to reconcile all the timelines with the amount of time that is passing between these movies and the attempts to keep the series modernized. Technology has evolved significantly since T1 to TG and it becomes rather silly that the wars somehow develops on an even remotely similar concept between them. Easiest example is T1 Kyle Reese talking about only going out at night or eventually you will get the point that Skynet could likely find prime time travel targets with social media.

I didn't think of that in the gaffes section of my post. Why would the HK's have trouble seeing at night, when they should be able to see in the infrared and ultraviolet spectrums? That might be another one that's impossible to reconcile logically and can only be chalked up to the limitations of writer's imaginations c1984.

[Kojiro]

Also, why would Skynet field armies of bipedal robots, when it's a very inefficient form of motion? This was a T2 gaffe that was continued in every movie after. In T1, you'll notice the future scenes feature hunter-killer tanks and flyers in the open, and the only terminators are infiltrators, which makes a lot more sense.

What bothered me, more than this, was the terminators weapons. Where did the plasma weapons come from? I sincerely doubt humans- post 1995 nuking- made such advanced weaponry. But it sorta continues the 'why use humanoid combatants' thing? Why are terminators running about with human scale weaponry? Weaponry that can hurt them no less?

[Tribble]

Also, why would Skynet field armies of bipedal robots, when it's a very inefficient form of motion? This was a T2 gaffe that was continued in every movie after. In T1, you'll notice the future scenes feature hunter-killer tanks and flyers in the open, and the only terminators are infiltrators, which makes a lot more sense.

What bothered me, more than this, was the terminators weapons. Where did the plasma weapons come from? I sincerely doubt humans- post 1995 nuking- made such advanced weaponry. But it sorta continues the 'why use humanoid combatants' thing? Why are terminators running about with human scale weaponry? Weaponry that can hurt them no less?

With regards to the plasma weapons, I think it's pretty clear that Skynet created them. It was capable of inventing things like the T-800, T-1000 and time travel, so I don't think plasma weapons are that much of a stretch.

And IMO there's a logical reason why Skynet eventually used human form terminators - it's called combined arms tactics. We still use infantry along with our tanks and aircraft today despite all our advances in technology. The human form may not be the most efficient in any particular task, but it is versatile in a wide variety of things.

IMO it was the lack of human form terminators throughout much of the war which was one of the main contributors to Skynet's defeat. Skynet was designed to fight a conventional (or nuclear) war with conventional tactics, and it was designed to use the human foot soldiers of the US army as part of it's combined arms tactics. After Judgement Day any human-form robots (if they existed at all at that point) would have been of extremely limited use. Building tanks and planes would have been easy and straightforward compared to building something like a Terminator. We build plenty of tanks and planes today, but we still have nothing remotely approaching the capabilities of the average foot-soldier. It would have taken Skynet a long time to design and build them, and IMO one of John Connor's main strategies was to exploit that to the fullest via guerilla tactics. By the time Skynet was able to fully match humanity on humanity's terms it was already too late, and it was stuck on the defensive.

The T-1000 is an entirely different story of course, though apparently Skynet was so afraid of it that it only created the prototype when it had already lost and had nothing left to lose.

[Kojiro]

With regards to the plasma weapons, I think it's pretty clear that Skynet created them. It was capable of inventing things like the T-800, T-1000 and time travel, so I don't think plasma weapons are that much of a stretch.

I assume as much. The question is a) why put those weapons in the field and b) if you're going to put them out there, why make them to be used by humans? Why give the damn thing a trigger, or an ergonomic grip? Bad enough you put technology into the field that can hurt your previously (largely) invulnerable soldiers but to explicitly make it user friendly to your enemy is just absurd.

[Tribble]

Well, I think a) is pretty straightforward too. The plasma weapons that we saw seem more or less identical, and just scale in power from punching a hole in a human's chest to vaporizing them in a single shot. I haven't seen a plasma weapon run out, and while I'm sure the smaller units have a finite supply I imagine the larger units in the HKs have practically unlimited ammo by being hooked up directly to the HKs' power source. Skynet has clearly managed to overcome the range problems associated with plasma, so that's no longer an issue. Nor does there appear to be any recoil, and they have a high firing rate. Plus, perhaps the plasma bolts can still cause serious injuries and burns by near misses. And of course they can ignite anything flammable, such as the fuel in Reese's truck.

But IMO the biggest reason is simply logistics. Skynet built a single scalable weapon that has a high ammo/fuel capacity, high rate of fire, and kills humans really well. I'm guessing from Skynet's perspective that's more efficient than manufacturing, storing and dispersing millions of rounds of various types of ammo.

As for b) that's only an issue for the hand-held weapons the Terminators were using. Not that the ones being used by the Terminators were that ergonomic. I don't think the average soldier would be able to carry and use the plasma weapon the way the future Infiltrator did in T1, and the ones in T2 seemed quite a bit larger and heavier than the ones the Resistance were carrying. We never see humans pick up a Terminator's plasma weapon off the ground and immediately start firing it. It's possible they were too heavy for humans to be practical and in order to make them work the resistance had to strip them and modify them to be lighter. Perhaps they were keyed in to the Terminator as well, so even if a human soldier picked one up and pulled the trigger they still wouldn't be able to fire it off the bat. I agree that the trigger is a little silly though.

[Purple]

This is the same argument that is mentioned when ever humanoid mecha are talked about. And I feel the answer is the same here. The human hand is a very good and adaptive griping mechanism. It can adapt to and utilize a wide variety of tools and weapons and generally do a lot of things. So if you want your robot soldiers to climb up stairs (whilst holding on to railings), fight room to room, throw grenades, lift rubble, manipulate doors, use buttons and levers, call an elevator, use a variety of weapons etc. than it makes sense to replicate that mechanism. And once you do that it makes sense to adapt your weapons to that mechanism for easy installation. Remember, a weapon or tool is not just there to serve that one soldier. You want to be able to take a damaged robot soldier, strip it for parts and use those for other troops. And in that context even a trigger mechanism makes sense as it is very well adapted to the humanoid hand.

[PREDATOR490]

The issue with this franchise is that it does not age well because of the attempts to modernize it with each installment but STILL try to keep the future bit the same.

Almost all films keep the final battle element to something like 2027 but Judgement Day keeps happening later and later. Result: The post-apocalyptic war with Skynet is getting shorter and shorter while somehow staying the same. This seems extremely unlikely without some serious hand waving. Even by modern technology standard it stretches belief Skynet can nuke the planet in 2015 and manage to push out armies of Terminators, HKs and plasma guns for a war that ends by 2030.

The sense of scale with Terminator was always kinda off to begin with. What exactly was Skynet using to fight it's war on humanity that was hard to match ?
Logically, Skynet can only be starting Post Judgement Day with whatever is left in the Ultra Nuked landscape and nothing the films have shown indicate Skynet starts with much at all. The closest T3 had was a room full of T-1 weapon platforms and a Hunter Killer.
It is beyond belief that Skynet can start off in a nuclear landscape with limited physical assets and escalate to the point it can push out advanced plasma weapons in time to stop the remnants of humanity obliterating it before the war gets to the 2020s stage.

[Bob the Gunslinger]

T1 indicates that plasma weapons were invented by humans, probably in the early 90's. The Terminator expected to be able to buy one. The plasma rifles used by the Terminators in the future probably came off the same assembly lines that existed before Judgement Day, which explains the handles and triggers. Having read some of the apocrypha, the humanoid Terminators were never supposed to be the main part of the army and only ended up fielded without their skins in T2 because it was the final battle and Skynet was desperate. Most of The Last Army were not from North America because Skynet had pretty much wiped out humanity in the northern hemisphere.

[Tribble]

The issue with this franchise is that it does not age well because of the attempts to modernize it with each installment but STILL try to keep the future bit the same.

Almost all films keep the final battle element to something like 2027 but Judgement Day keeps happening later and later. Result: The post-apocalyptic war with Skynet is getting shorter and shorter while somehow staying the same. This seems extremely unlikely without some serious hand waving. Even by modern technology standard it stretches belief Skynet can nuke the planet in 2015 and manage to push out armies of Terminators, HKs and plasma guns for a war that ends by 2030.

The solution to that is simple - make the birth of John Connor and the end of the war later. If Skynet nukes the world in 2017, in the new timeline the war ends ~2050 or so. In fact, this appears to be the case in TG - Sarah jumped forward in time and John Connor has not been conceived as of 2015. It's entirely possible that in the sequels events play out more or less the same, but just later than they did originally. Of course, the writers are probably too stupid to think of that one.

The sense of scale with Terminator was always kinda off to begin with. What exactly was Skynet using to fight it's war on humanity that was hard to match ?
Logically, Skynet can only be starting Post Judgement Day with whatever is left in the Ultra Nuked landscape and nothing the films have shown indicate Skynet starts with much at all. The closest T3 had was a room full of T-1 weapon platforms and a Hunter Killer.
It is beyond belief that Skynet can start off in a nuclear landscape with limited physical assets and escalate to the point it can push out advanced plasma weapons in time to stop the remnants of humanity obliterating it before the war gets to the 2020s stage.

The T3 Skynet was completely different than the original one, and it was probably destroyed right after Judgement Day because apparently there were no hardened facilities to protect itself and expand. T3 Skynet was on every electronic device with an internet connection, and had no system core. Great. And what exactly was it hoping for given that the nuclear exchange would have wiped out almost all of those computers outright, and those that survived would have been hampered by things like, oh I don't know, a lack of electricity? I can't see Skynet taking over the world just by being on the world's last cell phone.

We don't know for sure in T1 because we've never seen the rise of that Skynet. However, given the timeframe, I would postulate that T1's Skynet was originally designed to fight and win a nuclear war. I don't see it being much of a stretch that it's designers could have included heavily protected automated production facilities and resources right from the start. They could have done it as a sort of "worst-case scenario," where the USA was heavily nuked, most of the population including the armed forces and command staff were wiped out and Skynet was now literally the only thing standing between the US and a potential invasion. Also, Skynet was designed to be "trusted with it all," to identify threats and develop counter measures before they were even needed, and if that were the case it might have made sense to simply give Skynet all the tools it needed to do the job properly, from resource gathering to production and deployment. As well, they could have done it simply because over time the massive automation involved would have paid for itself via reduced labour costs.

IMO the reason why we haven't really seen the rise of Skynet on screen is because that would be kind of boring for most people. Going into great detail as to how Skynet managed it's operations from a logistics perspective isn't as "cool" as watching Arnold going about shooting things. Though I wish the writers of the novels would have had a bit more imagination.

T1 indicates that plasma weapons were invented by humans, probably in the early 90's. The Terminator expected to be able to buy one. The plasma rifles used by the Terminators in the future probably came off the same assembly lines that existed before Judgement Day, which explains the handles and triggers.

Well, it could be that the Terminator was just being literal minded. The gun store owner asked if it wanted anything else, and like Reese, it would have preferred future weapons over what was available. Kind of like when it was repeating "nice night for a walk" and whatnot.

read some of the apocrypha, the humanoid Terminators were never supposed to be the main part of the army and only ended up fielded without their skins in T2 because it was the final battle and Skynet was desperate. Most of The Last Army were not from North America because Skynet had pretty much wiped out humanity in the northern hemisphere.

Which would have been a ridiculously stupid move on Skynet's part because that would have left a massive gap in Skynet's combined-arms capability. As Purple noted the human form is actually capable of a wide variety of tasks and I don't think Skynet was stupid enough to hamstring itself by not using robotic infantry, especially given that it was fighting humans. More likely that it's main problem wasn't that it was forced to use human-form robots but rather it didn't have any in the opening stages of the war when they were most needed.

And why does everyone get the impression that the Terminator endoskeleton's were not built for combat? We only see them for a few seconds at most, and they seem pretty durable to me. The Infiltrator in T1 took shots to the face from a plasma rifle, and apparently the only damage it sustained from that was it's organic covering in that area was destroyed so that it's eyes glowed. In T2 an already damaged T-800 still took several shots from a plasma rifle to completely destroy. Yes, a Terminator was more vulnerable to plasma weapons than a Hunter Killer - just like how infantry today are more vulnerable to weapons fire than a main battle tank. That doesn't negate the value of having infantry in an army, it's role is just different from that of a main battle tank. And don't forget that Terminators in T1 and T2 were still far more resilient to weapons fire than their human targets.

In TG the Terminators are significantly weaker though - one shot from a high-powered rifle or plasma rifle is apparently sufficient to kill one. This seems rather stupid given the amount of damage Terminators took in previous films, but I guess the writers were in a hurry in the case of Reese's Infiltrator and wanted to show how "badass" Sarah was by taking down a Terminator with one shot.

[Kojiro]

Well, I think a) is pretty straightforward too. The plasma weapons that we saw seem more or less identical, and just scale in power from punching a hole in a human's chest to vaporizing them in a single shot.

The problem is that they also damage Skynet units that were, until the deployment of these weapons, largely bulletproof.

I haven't seen a plasma weapon run out, and while I'm sure the smaller units have a finite supply I imagine the larger units in the HKs have practically unlimited ammo by being hooked up directly to the HKs' power source.

I don't doubt that's true, it makes perfect sense to power such a weapon in such a way (and why I always thought space marines should have integrated laser weapons but that's another topic). The larger, more power hungry weapons- the kind that can only be vehicle mounted- I don't have an issue with. But we've seen resistance fighters with the hand held versions so they clearly have an external power supply. Making such a weapon self contained- and thereby human friendly- would actually be an engineering challenge. Simply attaching it to the arm (and powering it from the internal plasma reactors) would be easier, less material and more difficult to salvage. As is it appears all that is required is to pick one up.

Plus, perhaps the plasma bolts can still cause serious injuries and burns by near misses. And of course they can ignite anything flammable, such as the fuel in Reese's truck.

Which is a good reason to use such weapons on your HKs. It's not a good reason to make a human useable version.

But IMO the biggest reason is simply logistics. Skynet built a single scalable weapon that has a high ammo/fuel capacity, high rate of fire, and kills humans really well.

But it also kills Skynet units really well.

I'm guessing from Skynet's perspective that's more efficient than manufacturing, storing and dispersing millions of rounds of various types of ammo.

If a human run military can manage such logistics I have no doubt an AI like Skynet can do so, even if it simply decides that 5.56mm is the caliber it's going to use.

As for b) that's only an issue for the hand-held weapons the Terminators were using. Not that the ones being used by the Terminators were that ergonomic. I don't think the average soldier would be able to carry and use the plasma weapon the way the future Infiltrator did in T1, and the ones in T2 seemed quite a bit larger and heavier than the ones the Resistance were carrying.

They have a grip, stock, detachable magazine and trigger- none of which a terminator actually needs if build the weapon into the arm.


Note that the rifle we see more T800s use. There is a heavier version we see in T2 (presumably the same used by the T1 infiltrator but I don't think we ever get a good look).

We never see humans pick up a Terminator's plasma weapon off the ground and immediately start firing it. It's possible they were too heavy for humans to be practical and in order to make them work the resistance had to strip them and modify them to be lighter. Perhaps they were keyed in to the Terminator as well, so even if a human soldier picked one up and pulled the trigger they still wouldn't be able to fire it off the bat. I agree that the trigger is a little silly though.

I'll grant you we never see it. But the first image that comes back when you search for 'terminator resistance fighter plasma' is this:

Now I don't know if you want to accept TSCC in there, since this comes from that but it does clearly show a resistance fighter with one of the weapons. We don't know how hard it was to salvage but it's clearly possible. There's other shots of Derek Reese with one too, which doesn't appear to be modified in any way. And yes, the trigger is perhaps the worst offender, since without one they have to be retrofitted while the terminator could have any number of links to the weapon.

T1 indicates that plasma weapons were invented by humans, probably in the early 90's. The Terminator expected to be able to buy one.

I think that's just a gaffe to be honest. It seems like too much of a mistake given the knowledge terminators display.

[Tribble]

The problem is that they also damage Skynet units that were, until the deployment of these weapons, largely bulletproof.

We don't know that. It's likely Skynet's armour technology was being developed at the same time as its weapons, and early Terminators could have been taken out by bullets. The older Terminators in TS were capable of being stopped by bullets and even knives if one knew where to hit them. At worst one could argue that the plasma weapons made armour improvements less effective than they could have been, though the Resistance would have still had to aquire plasma weapons in order to remain effective, which wouldn't have been an easy task (I doubt Terminators would voluntarily surrender and hand them over).

I don't doubt that's true, it makes perfect sense to power such a weapon in such a way (and why I always thought space marines should have integrated laser weapons but that's another topic). The larger, more power hungry weapons- the kind that can only be vehicle mounted- I don't have an issue with. But we've seen resistance fighters with the hand held versions so they clearly have an external power supply. Making such a weapon self contained- and thereby human friendly- would actually be an engineering challenge. Simply attaching it to the arm (and powering it from the internal plasma reactors) would be easier, less material and more difficult to salvage. As is it appears all that is required is to pick one up.
]

Skynet did exactly that with the T-X. It could simply be that up until the T-X Skynet didn't have compact reactors capable of generating enough power to run the endoskeleton and power a plasma weapon at the same time. Attaching it to the arm would present some difficulties though - what would happen if the weapon were damaged? If it were holding a weapon in its hands it could simply discard it and pick up another, but if it had a weapon physically attached that weapon would have be repaired and/or replaced before it could be used again.

If a human run military can manage such logistics I have no doubt an AI like Skynet can do so, even if it simply decides that 5.56mm is the caliber it's going to use.

Yes, I'm sure it could, but I doubt it would have been as efficient as "supply every HK/Terminator with a weapon that has for all intents and purposes, unlimited/very large amount of ammo during a battle." Which is the chain guns in T:S were soooo stupid - if it weren't for movie magic they would have run out within a few seconds given physical constraints, and the Terminator would have been stuck with a weapon on its arm that was now completely useless.

Perhaps the best example would be the "future infiltrator" battle vs the police station shootout in T1. In the future battle, the Infiltrator never had to reload its weapon and it was shooting damn fast. Whereas the Terminator in the police station had to reload, and it ran out of ammo while firing at Reese and Sarah as they escaped. IMO those reasons alone are enough to switch over to plasma weapons, even if it made the Terminators more vulnerable to fire. And it's not like the Terminators from T1 and T2 could be one shotted from a plasma rifle - as I stated before the future Infiltrator took shots to the face, while an already heavily damaged Terminator in T2 still took several more shots to completely destroy.

They have a grip, stock, detachable magazine and trigger- none of which a terminator actually needs if build the weapon into the arm.

Good luck trying to pick that up and using it effectively during a battle. When you see the Terminator holding it, it looks pretty damn big and unwieldy for a human. And as I said, a weapon that's built into the arm and cannot be swapped at a moment's notice has its own disadvantages.

I agree though that the trigger is a big offender - there should be some way of having an easily switchable weapon for the Terminator endoskeleton to use that wouldn't need an acutal trigger in order to fire.