1198 réponses à ce sujet

[JKoopman]

Almostfaceman wrote...

spacehamsterZH wrote...

Almostfaceman wrote...

HappyHappyJoyJoy wrote...

Leaving it as a mystery probably means the writers haven't figured it out either.  Otherwise they'd tell us.  

No offense, but I'm really not going to rely on your opinion on what the writers may or may not have figured out yet.  You're simply not in a position to know anything about that.

You're just picking out one poorly phrased part of his response here. HHJJ's main point stands - the motivation of the main villain(s) in ME2 remains a mystery. They were building some largely unexplained McGuffin for purposes unknown, directed by a Reaper called Harbinger who is... somewhere, but we don't know where.

You can say that's all fine with you and you don't need an explanation for anything, but it does mean we were basically shooting at a bunch of bug-faced bad guys whose motivation we never got to figure out for the entire game, and most people would say a main villain with no apparent motivation is not typically a sign of good writing. Shoehorning the Collectors into the ME plot so that ME2 would have its own cohesive dramatic arc and conclusion and not suffer too much from being the second act in a trilogy may have been a good idea in theory, but what came out of it just didn't make a whole lot of sense or accomplish anything in the grand scheme of things. As evidenced by Arrival, if nothing else.

The bug faced bad guys were taking humans.  Before I knew their motivations, I knew I had to stop them.  When I found out later that they were using humans to make a Reaper, I found out what the bug faced guys motivations were.  Now I'm waiting to find out what the Reapers are all about in ME3.  That is cohesive enough for me.  I can't speak for you nor do I pretend to do so.

What (building a Human Reaper) isn't the same as Why (the reason they're doing so). You find out that the Collectors are stealing humans to build... something? But we don't know what that something is intended for, how it's being made, or even what it necessarily is.

Imagine a story about a mad scientist. This scientist is stealing various pieces of technology from differing research laboratories and abducting people off the street for some nefarious purpose. The protagonist of this story manages to track down the villian and all that's ever revealed is that the villian is using these parts and people to build some kind of machine, but the purpose of this machine is never elaborated on or explained. It's just a thing. A unexplained setpiece that's promptly blown up. Does that sound like a good story?

Modifié par JKoopman, 03 avril 2011 - 01:13 .

[HappyHappyJoyJoy]

Almostfaceman wrote...

HappyHappyJoyJoy wrote...

Almostfaceman wrote...

The bug faced bad guys were taking humans.  Before I knew their motivations, I knew I had to stop them.  When I found out later that they were using humans to make a Reaper, I found out what the bug faced guys motivations were.  Now I'm waiting to find out what the Reapers are all about in ME3.  That is cohesive enough for me.  I can't speak for you nor do I pretend to do so.

That's not motivation.  That's their action.  Their motivation is for why they wanted to build a Human Reaper, and we've never gotten a hint for that. 

No, the bugs motivation was to build a human reaper.  What the Reapers motivations are is a separate matter to me.  The bugs were doing what they were told.  At the beginning of the story, we did not know why they were doing what they were doing. At the end of the story, we know why the bugs are doing what they were doing.

I disagree. 

As a counterpoint: imagine in ME1, we found out that the Geth were just doing what Sovereign told them to do.  That Saren was just doing what he was told to do.  That all the bad guys were just following Sovereign's orders.  And zero motivation for Sovereign.

It would have felt cheap.  It would have been poor storytelling.  It would have reduced the emotional impact of the story.

That motivation added depth to the story.   Knowing why Saren was helping the Reapers helped us understand his character and talk him down at the end of the game.  Knowing why the Geth were helping Sovereign was important, not just in ME1, but also in ME2 as well when we deal with Legion.  Knowing why Sovereign wanted to attack the Citadel was critical because it allowed our character to focus on stopping him from taking control over the Relay.  Let's call that "good writing."


We didn't get that in ME2. 

Let's call that "bad writing."

[Almostfaceman]

JKoopman wrote...

Almostfaceman wrote...

spacehamsterZH wrote...

Almostfaceman wrote...

HappyHappyJoyJoy wrote...

Leaving it as a mystery probably means the writers haven't figured it out either.  Otherwise they'd tell us.  

No offense, but I'm really not going to rely on your opinion on what the writers may or may not have figured out yet.  You're simply not in a position to know anything about that.

You're just picking out one poorly phrased part of his response here. HHJJ's main point stands - the motivation of the main villain(s) in ME2 remains a mystery. They were building some largely unexplained McGuffin for purposes unknown, directed by a Reaper called Harbinger who is... somewhere, but we don't know where.

You can say that's all fine with you and you don't need an explanation for anything, but it does mean we were basically shooting at a bunch of bug-faced bad guys whose motivation we never got to figure out for the entire game, and most people would say a main villain with no apparent motivation is not typically a sign of good writing. Shoehorning the Collectors into the ME plot so that ME2 would have its own cohesive dramatic arc and conclusion and not suffer too much from being the second act in a trilogy may have been a good idea in theory, but what came out of it just didn't make a whole lot of sense or accomplish anything in the grand scheme of things. As evidenced by Arrival, if nothing else.

The bug faced bad guys were taking humans.  Before I knew their motivations, I knew I had to stop them.  When I found out later that they were using humans to make a Reaper, I found out what the bug faced guys motivations were.  Now I'm waiting to find out what the Reapers are all about in ME3.  That is cohesive enough for me.  I can't speak for you nor do I pretend to do so.

What (building a Human Reaper) isn't the same as Why (the reason they're doing so). You find out that the Collectors are stealing humans to build... something? But we don't know what that something is intended for, how it's being made, or even what it necessarily is.

Imagine a story about a mad scientist. This scientist is stealing various pieces of technology from differing research laboratories and abducting people off the street for some nefarious purpose. The protagonist of this story manages to track down the villian and all that's ever revealed is that the villian is using these parts and people to build some kind of machine, but the purpose of this machine is never elaborated on or revealed. It's just a thing. A unexplained setpiece that's promptly blown up. Does that sound like a good story?

No, I don't look at this the same way you do.  I'm not trying to frustrate you but I'm being as clear as I can.  I'm also trying to avoid repeating myself so bear with that as well please.

With regards to your example - if I'm anticipating another chapter to the story, I am satisfied with not knowing the purpose of the machine and I can wait until the next chapter.

[Almostfaceman]

HappyHappyJoyJoy wrote...

Almostfaceman wrote...

HappyHappyJoyJoy wrote...

Almostfaceman wrote...

The bug faced bad guys were taking humans.  Before I knew their motivations, I knew I had to stop them.  When I found out later that they were using humans to make a Reaper, I found out what the bug faced guys motivations were.  Now I'm waiting to find out what the Reapers are all about in ME3.  That is cohesive enough for me.  I can't speak for you nor do I pretend to do so.

That's not motivation.  That's their action.  Their motivation is for why they wanted to build a Human Reaper, and we've never gotten a hint for that. 

No, the bugs motivation was to build a human reaper.  What the Reapers motivations are is a separate matter to me.  The bugs were doing what they were told.  At the beginning of the story, we did not know why they were doing what they were doing. At the end of the story, we know why the bugs are doing what they were doing.

I disagree. 

As a counterpoint: imagine in ME1, we found out that the Geth were just doing what Sovereign told them to do.  That Saren was just doing what he was told to do.  That all the bad guys were just following Sovereign's orders.  And zero motivation for Sovereign.

It would have felt cheap.  It would have been poor storytelling.  It would have reduced the emotional impact of the story.

That motivation added depth to the story.   Knowing why Saren was helping the Reapers helped us understand his character and talk him down at the end of the game.  Knowing why the Geth were helping Sovereign was important, not just in ME1, but also in ME2 as well when we deal with Legion.  Knowing why Sovereign wanted to attack the Citadel was critical because it allowed our character to focus on stopping him from taking control over the Relay.  Let's call that "good writing."


We didn't get that in ME2. 

Let's call that "bad writing."

Well, for me, we did in the end find out that Saren was a puppet of Sovereign and was just "doing what Sovereign told him to do".  Saren was indoctrinated and didn't realize it. 

Look, I appreciate you didn't get what you want out of ME2 - but I did.  I've played it literally dozens of times - and I've played ME1 even more.  I just don't have the same perspective as you.  It's all good.

[Zahxia]

Mesina2 wrote...

piemanz wrote...

Fiery Phoenix wrote...

Smud's response to 3-3.

I decided to bite the bullet and attempt to watch this video.After sitting through about half of it which consisted of Smud sidestepping and misdirecting arguements.About half way through Sqee asks something like, "if you analyze everything this much, how do you enjoy anything".Smuds response basicly equates to "i enjoy trolling the fanbase", at this point i stopped watching and he basicly lost what little credibility he had with me.

Even squee913 told he lost all his faith on smudboy after watching that video.

After watching both Squee913s and Smuds responses in their entirety this whole 'sidestepping' argument is ridiculous and dismissive. You want to know why you couldn't watch the entire response based on someone with a contrary opinion? One word: Fanboy.

Criticism, debate and conflict lead to exhanges of ideas and make thingsbetter. Learn to tolerate people with contrary opinions especially those that can actually present them in an eloquent manner. It doesn't matter if you don't like their attitude because it's irrelevant.

Squee913s response screams of someone carrying water for a game developer simply out of brand loyalty. His arguments are more like rationalisations with no tangible evidence or any outside reference to validate his ideas.

He spends far too much time questioning the inegrity of Smud (which is an incredibly low form of argument along with the old 'strawman') or creating their own threads between a plot points and their own imagination which is the kind of logic usually attributed to conspiracy theorists not scholars.

Instead of tackling Smuds videos directly he should have made a counter-analysis stating his argument and citing his evidence. As opposed to starting internet drama and using motivationals. (So clever!)

Modifié par Zahxia, 03 avril 2011 - 01:21 .

[HappyHappyJoyJoy]

Almostfaceman wrote...

Well, for me, we did in the end find out that Saren was a puppet of Sovereign and was just "doing what Sovereign told him to do".  Saren was indoctrinated and didn't realize it. 

Not just that, but we also understood why Saren went to Feros, why he sent Benezia to Noveria, why he set up cloning facilities at Virmire, why he attacked the Citadel and why he was in the Citadel Tower.

Cool eh?

[JKoopman]

You know, I have to ask, why do people assume that we're going to receive any further elaboration on the Human Reaper and it's purpose in ME3?

The Human Reaper was Reaper Plan... what are we on now, E? The Human Reaper was Reaper Plan E for infiltrating the galaxy. Not only have we destroyed Plan E and eradicated the Collectors as of the end of ME2, but we've actually gone a step further and foiled Reaper Plan F as well with Arrival. At this point, what possible relevance does the Human Reaper have to the plot of ME3? We may as well expect them to go back and elaborate on Reaper Plan B (The Rachni War) while we're at it.

Again, I would dearly love for all of ME2's unanswered questions to be elaborated on in ME3, but I just don't see much cause to raise my expectations in that regard.

Modifié par JKoopman, 03 avril 2011 - 01:26 .

[Almostfaceman]

HappyHappyJoyJoy wrote...

Almostfaceman wrote...

Well, for me, we did in the end find out that Saren was a puppet of Sovereign and was just "doing what Sovereign told him to do".  Saren was indoctrinated and didn't realize it. 

Not just that, but we also understood why Saren went to Feros, why he sent Benezia to Noveria, why he set up cloning facilities at Virmire, why he attacked the Citadel and why he was in the Citadel Tower.

Cool eh?

Yes, because a Reaper told him to do so.  Those Reapers motivations are not clear - even Vigil claims that those motivations are not important and that we have to focus on the fact that the Reapers are trying to destroy us.

With the Collectors, what I found out about why they were taking humans was "cool" to me.

I won't ask you "cool, huh?" because you've made it apparent you don't think it's cool.  

[piemanz]

JKoopman wrote...

squee913 wrote...

Lastly, sarcastic or not saying that you laugh at sci-fi fans in general is an insult to anyone who ever enjoyed any sci-fi movie, book, game, or show. Just because you are trying to be sarcastic does not mean you are not going to insult people. I don't understand why he keeps throwing out personal insults to me and everyone who does not agree with him. It only hurts his cause. a few might agree, some might overlook, but most just see it as childish. I may attack his arguments and criticize his presentation methods, but I never insulted his character, intelligence, or taste. I understand that some people can not tell the difference, but there is a clear difference.

You say that smudboy is going through ME2's story looking for anything he can nitpick and hold up as an example of inconsistency or sloppy writing. I say that you're going through smudboy's responses looking for anything that you can nitpick and hold up as an example of rude or insulting behaviour. I consider the level of restraint he's shown so far to be remarkable considering the amount of ridicule and the increasingly condescending tone that you've been leveling at him in your videos for the better part of the last 30 minutes. But hey, that's just my opinion.

Look, i'm not here because i'm a bioware fan, i'm here because i'm an ME fan.I have no probelm with constructive critisism, but going through and critisising every minor detail of the game is a whole different thing.Usually i would put it down to him just not liking the game or being disapointed with the story.But when he says something like he laughs at anyone who's a fan of the game, i can't help but feel his videos are all designed to mock me for liking it.

Sure, you may like ME1 and dislike ME2 but thats your perogative, but how would you feel if i went through every minor detail / inconstistency in the game with my  opinion and then exclaimed that i'm laughing at you for liking it.

Personelly i'm amazed you can't see how this would be insulting.

Modifié par piemanz, 03 avril 2011 - 01:28 .

[Iakus]

Almostfaceman wrote...

So, you're saying that everyone who shares my opinion about ME2 is as  in poor taste as, say, a Transformer fan?

Not at all.  What I'm saying is that popularity=/= quality. Lots of people like the transformers movies.  But do you ureally think thirty years from now peple will be citing Revenge of the Fallen as an example of a great middle volume to a series?

I  for one do not think Mass Effect 2 will be remembered ten years from now the way Baldur's Gate 2 is now, unless ME 3 really knocks it out of the ballpark.  And I am having serious doubt of that happening.

[Almostfaceman]

JKoopman wrote...

You know, I have to ask, why do people assume that we're going to receive any further elaboration on the Human Reaper and it's purpose in ME3?

The Human Reaper was Reaper Plan... what are we on now, E? The Human Reaper was Reaper Plan E for infiltrating the galaxy. Not only have we destroyed Plan E and eradicated the Collectors as of the end of ME2, but we've actually gone a step further and foiled Reaper Plan F as well. At this point, what possible relevance does the Human Reaper have to the plot of ME3? We may as well expect them to go back and elaborate on Reaper Plan B (The Rachni War) while we're at it.

Again, I would dearly love for all of ME2's unanswered questions to be elaborated on in ME3, but I just don't see much cause to raise my expectations in that regard.

i would ask a question in reply - why would you assume that those questions won't be answered?  In a book, that's where the questions get answered - at the end of the tale.  That's the kind of story-telling I'm familiar with.

[HappyHappyJoyJoy]

Almostfaceman wrote...

HappyHappyJoyJoy wrote...

Almostfaceman wrote...

Well, for me, we did in the end find out that Saren was a puppet of Sovereign and was just "doing what Sovereign told him to do".  Saren was indoctrinated and didn't realize it. 

Not just that, but we also understood why Saren went to Feros, why he sent Benezia to Noveria, why he set up cloning facilities at Virmire, why he attacked the Citadel and why he was in the Citadel Tower.

Cool eh?

Yes, because a Reaper told him to do so.  Those Reapers motivations are not clear - even Vigil claims that those motivations are not important and that we have to focus on the fact that the Reapers are trying to destroy us.

With the Collectors, what I found out about why they were taking humans was "cool" to me.

I won't ask you "cool, huh?" because you've made it apparent you don't think it's cool.  

No, he went to Feros because he needed the Cipher to understand the Prothean Beacon.  He sent Benezia to Noveria to get the coordinates for the Mu Relay.  He was at Virmire to set up a Krogan army to attack the Citadel.  He went to Ilos to get to the Conduit so he could coordinate an attack on the Citadel with Sovereign, disable the guns, and close the tower so Sovereign could open the Relay without being interrupted by attacking fleets.

Sovereign organized this to open the relay to Dark Space because... well, you know the rest.  Sovereign's motivation - get the Reaper fleets through and destroy organic life - was clear.

What was the point of the Human Reaper?  Why did the Reapers want it?  When it was complete, what was it supposed to do? 

[Iakus]

Almostfaceman wrote...

HappyHappyJoyJoy wrote...

Almostfaceman wrote...

Well, for me, we did in the end find out that Saren was a puppet of Sovereign and was just "doing what Sovereign told him to do".  Saren was indoctrinated and didn't realize it. 

Not just that, but we also understood why Saren went to Feros, why he sent Benezia to Noveria, why he set up cloning facilities at Virmire, why he attacked the Citadel and why he was in the Citadel Tower.

Cool eh?

Yes, because a Reaper told him to do so.  Those Reapers motivations are not clear - even Vigil claims that those motivations are not important and that we have to focus on the fact that the Reapers are trying to destroy us.

With the Collectors, what I found out about why they were taking humans was "cool" to me.

I won't ask you "cool, huh?" because you've made it apparent you don't think it's cool.  

Why did Saren serve Sovereign?

"Is submission not prefereable to extinction?"

He was halfway indoctrinated and thought he could prove the worth of biologicals as servants to the Reapers.  Motivation.

Now about that Human Reaper...

[Almostfaceman]

iakus wrote...

Almostfaceman wrote...

So, you're saying that everyone who shares my opinion about ME2 is as  in poor taste as, say, a Transformer fan?

Not at all.  What I'm saying is that popularity=/= quality. Lots of people like the transformers movies.  But do you ureally think thirty years from now peple will be citing Revenge of the Fallen as an example of a great middle volume to a series?

I  for one do not think Mass Effect 2 will be remembered ten years from now the way Baldur's Gate 2 is now, unless ME 3 really knocks it out of the ballpark.  And I am having serious doubt of that happening.

And I'm making the point that quality is subjective.  Other people share my opinion, a lot of them.  That's what Bioware is shooting for, to sell a tale.  They are succeeding.  Just as they did with Baldur's Gate 2 (a great game).  With regards to how ME2 will be remembered, well, you're entitled to your opinion - but that's all it is - you're opinion.  I know in my case, I will look at ME2 with as much fondness later as I look at Baldur's Gate 2 now.

[JKoopman]

piemanz wrote...

JKoopman wrote...

squee913 wrote...

Lastly, sarcastic or not saying that you laugh at sci-fi fans in general is an insult to anyone who ever enjoyed any sci-fi movie, book, game, or show. Just because you are trying to be sarcastic does not mean you are not going to insult people. I don't understand why he keeps throwing out personal insults to me and everyone who does not agree with him. It only hurts his cause. a few might agree, some might overlook, but most just see it as childish. I may attack his arguments and criticize his presentation methods, but I never insulted his character, intelligence, or taste. I understand that some people can not tell the difference, but there is a clear difference.

You say that smudboy is going through ME2's story looking for anything he can nitpick and hold up as an example of inconsistency or sloppy writing. I say that you're going through smudboy's responses looking for anything that you can nitpick and hold up as an example of rude or insulting behaviour. I consider the level of restraint he's shown so far to be remarkable considering the amount of ridicule and the increasingly condescending tone that you've been leveling at him in your videos for the better part of the last 30 minutes. But hey, that's just my opinion.

Look, i'm not here because i'm a bioware fan, i'm here because i'm an ME fan.I have no probelm with constructive critisism, but going through and critisising every minor detail of the game is a whole different thing.Usually i would put it down to him just not liking the game or being disapointed with the story.But when he says something like he laughs at anyone who's a fan of the game, i can't help but feel his videos are all designed to mock me for liking it.

Sure, you may like ME1 and dislike ME2 but thats your perogative, but how would you feel if i went through every minor detail / inconstistency in the game with my  opinion and then exclaimed that i'm laughing at you for liking it.

Personelly i'm amazed you can't see how this would be insulting.

Is it something that Ghandi would do? Doubtful. But this is the internet. Grow a thicker skin. Smudboy doesn't laugh at people for liking what he considers to be bad writing. He laughs at people for trying to defend bad writing by inventing narrative and arguing after the fact in an attempt to rationalize inconsistencies and plotholes, and fill in gaps in the storytelling with supposition. If you simply like the story then that's all you have to say. He has no way of countering that. But as soon as you start trying to refute his points with what amounts to imagined narrative and personal opinion, you become fair game.

Modifié par JKoopman, 03 avril 2011 - 01:39 .

[Almostfaceman]

iakus wrote...

Almostfaceman wrote...

HappyHappyJoyJoy wrote...

Almostfaceman wrote...

Well, for me, we did in the end find out that Saren was a puppet of Sovereign and was just "doing what Sovereign told him to do".  Saren was indoctrinated and didn't realize it. 

Not just that, but we also understood why Saren went to Feros, why he sent Benezia to Noveria, why he set up cloning facilities at Virmire, why he attacked the Citadel and why he was in the Citadel Tower.

Cool eh?

Yes, because a Reaper told him to do so.  Those Reapers motivations are not clear - even Vigil claims that those motivations are not important and that we have to focus on the fact that the Reapers are trying to destroy us.

With the Collectors, what I found out about why they were taking humans was "cool" to me.

I won't ask you "cool, huh?" because you've made it apparent you don't think it's cool.  

Why did Saren serve Sovereign?

"Is submission not prefereable to extinction?"

He was halfway indoctrinated and thought he could prove the worth of biologicals as servants to the Reapers.  Motivation.

Now about that Human Reaper...

To me, what Saren said was what Sovereign wanted him to think, becasuse Sovereign was controlling his thoughts.  Sovereign forcibly manipulated Saren into thinking that organics could be saved.  The Collectors were complete husks but the results were the same.  Saren really never had a choice after he'd been exposed to Sovereign for more than a few days.

Modifié par Almostfaceman, 03 avril 2011 - 01:40 .

[MassEffect762]

Differing opinions sure are a hot topic for forums. hansel.

www.youtube.com/watch

I've wondered how much better ME2 would have been if the game revolved around the Reapers more.
All the recruitment missions dealt the game a serious blow imo, mostly because they don't seem neccessary.(yet)

The experience as a whole was unmoving imo.

Modifié par MassEffect762, 03 avril 2011 - 01:42 .

[Lukertin]

JKoopman wrote...
Is it something that Ghandi would do? Doubtful. But this is the internet. Grow a thicker skin. Smudboy doesn't laugh at people for liking what he considers to be bad writing. He laughs at people for trying to defend bad writing by inventing narrative and arguing after the fact in an attempt to rationalize inconsistencies and plotholes, and fill in gaps in the storytelling with supposition. If you simply like the story then that's all you have to say. He has no way of countering that. But as soon as you start trying to refute his points with what amounts to imagined narrative and personal opinion, you become fair game.

I could say the same thing about people attacking good writing by inventing inconsistencies and plotholes, and expanding gaps in storytelling.

[Almostfaceman]

JKoopman wrote...

Is it something that Ghandi would do? Doubtful. But this is the internet. Grow a thicker skin. Smudboy doesn't laugh at people for liking what he considers to be bad writing. He laughs at people for trying to defend bad writing by inventing narrative and arguing after the fact in an attempt to rationalize inconsistencies and plotholes, and fill in gaps in the storytelling with supposition. If you simply like the story then that's all you have to say. He has no way of countering that. But as soon as you start trying to refute his points with what amounts to imagined narrative and personal opinion, you become fair game.

I don't know, the people that like the story aren't just saying they like the story over and over - they're engaging in meaningful debate.  That you're discounting one viewpoint as supposition, rationlized inconsistencies and plotholes, and filling in gaps, kinda gives the appearance that you're losing focus on the fact that this whole process - both sides of the critique - are SUBJECTIVE.

[JKoopman]

Almostfaceman wrote...

JKoopman wrote...

You know, I have to ask, why do people assume that we're going to receive any further elaboration on the Human Reaper and it's purpose in ME3?

The Human Reaper was Reaper Plan... what are we on now, E? The Human Reaper was Reaper Plan E for infiltrating the galaxy. Not only have we destroyed Plan E and eradicated the Collectors as of the end of ME2, but we've actually gone a step further and foiled Reaper Plan F as well. At this point, what possible relevance does the Human Reaper have to the plot of ME3? We may as well expect them to go back and elaborate on Reaper Plan B (The Rachni War) while we're at it.

Again, I would dearly love for all of ME2's unanswered questions to be elaborated on in ME3, but I just don't see much cause to raise my expectations in that regard.

i would ask a question in reply - why would you assume that those questions won't be answered?  In a book, that's where the questions get answered - at the end of the tale.  That's the kind of story-telling I'm familiar with.

And I'll answer your question with another question: Did The Lord of the Rings go back and elaborate on the nature and motivations of the Balrog in subsequent chapters?

The Human Reaper was a side story. As it's already been defeated, it's not relevant to the main plot, which is stopping the Reaper invasion. It was simply a sub-plot within the larger plot; one of three alternate Reaper plans that Shepard has already foiled. I expect further elaboration on it and it's purpose in ME3 the same way I expect further elaboration on the Alpha Relay in ME3...

[piemanz]

JKoopman wrote...


Is it something that Ghandi would do? Doubtful. But this is the internet. Grow a thicker skin. Smudboy doesn't laugh at people for liking what he considers to be bad writing. He laughs at people for trying to defend bad writing by inventing narrative and arguing after the fact in an attempt to rationalize inconsistencies and plotholes.

Exactly, he's laughing at Squee and anyone else who disagrees with him and his personal opinions., which is usually me.

JKoopman wrote...

Aand fill in gaps in the storytelling with supposition. If you simply like the story then that's all you have to say. He has no way of countering that. But as soon as you start trying to refute his points with what amounts to imagined narrative and personal opinion, you become fair game

Of course theres going to imagined narrative and personal opinion, it would be boring if there wasn't. I wouldn't be as exited for ME3 as i am now if there wasn't things i wanted to finaly get the answer to and quite frankly it would be terrible writing if i already knew exactly what was going to happen in ME3.

Modifié par piemanz, 03 avril 2011 - 01:52 .

[Almostfaceman]

JKoopman wrote...

Almostfaceman wrote...

JKoopman wrote...

You know, I have to ask, why do people assume that we're going to receive any further elaboration on the Human Reaper and it's purpose in ME3?

The Human Reaper was Reaper Plan... what are we on now, E? The Human Reaper was Reaper Plan E for infiltrating the galaxy. Not only have we destroyed Plan E and eradicated the Collectors as of the end of ME2, but we've actually gone a step further and foiled Reaper Plan F as well. At this point, what possible relevance does the Human Reaper have to the plot of ME3? We may as well expect them to go back and elaborate on Reaper Plan B (The Rachni War) while we're at it.

Again, I would dearly love for all of ME2's unanswered questions to be elaborated on in ME3, but I just don't see much cause to raise my expectations in that regard.

i would ask a question in reply - why would you assume that those questions won't be answered?  In a book, that's where the questions get answered - at the end of the tale.  That's the kind of story-telling I'm familiar with.

And I'll answer your question with another question: Did The Lord of the Rings go back and elaborate on the nature and motivations of the Balrog in subsequent chapters?

The Human Reaper was a side story. As it's already been defeated, it's not relevant to the main plot, which is stopping the Reaper invasion. It was simply a sub-plot within the larger plot; one of three alternate Reaper plans that Shepard has already foiled. I expect further elaboration on it and it's purpose in ME3 the same way I expect further elaboration on the Alpha Relay in ME3...

Mass Effect is not Lord of the Rings.  Do I really have to give a list of books that I've read that illustrate my point?  

Look, it's a free country.  Make your suppositions about the Human Reapers if you want.  Since we don't know the end of the story yet, that's what they are - suppositions.

[Iakus]

Almostfaceman wrote...

To me, what Saren said was what Sovereign wanted him to think, becasuse Sovereign was controlling his thoughts.  Sovereign forcibly manipulated Saren into thinking that organics could be saved.  The Collectors were complete husks but the results were the same.  Saren really never had a choice after he'd been exposed to Sovereign for more than a few days.

All right, what are the Reapers after?

To continue the cycle of extinction they have performed uninterrupted for tens of millions of years (at least)

Why?

Their reasons are beyond us (okay, I am willing to table that one until ME 3.  But it better be a doozy)

How?

Manually activate Citadel dark space relay.

For what purpose?

Reapers are waiting at the other end.  Keepers which nomally perform this task no longer respond to Sovereign's signal.  Relay opens, cycle can begin.

Okay, that didn't work.  What's next.

Spend years if not decades kidnapping human colonies

Why?

To build a human Reaper

How?

It's beyond you

For what purpose?

...No data available...

Modifié par iakus, 03 avril 2011 - 01:56 .

[Whatever42]

iakus wrote...

Not at all.  What I'm saying is that popularity=/= quality. Lots of people like the transformers movies.  But do you ureally think thirty years from now peple will be citing Revenge of the Fallen as an example of a great middle volume to a series?

I  for one do not think Mass Effect 2 will be remembered ten years from now the way Baldur's Gate 2 is now, unless ME 3 really knocks it out of the ballpark.  And I am having serious doubt of that happening.

Baldur's Gate 2 really isn't on that much of a pedestal. And games like NWN and Jade Empire are barely remembered at all. BG and BG2 are credited with the return of WRPGs is all.

Bioware writing as video game writing is pretty good, if usually a little cliche. While haters marvel that we fanboys dare to defend it, we marvel that haters bother to attack it.  Why exactly are the haters here? Do they think that by insulting bioware and bioware fanboys that we'll recognize their brilliance and our own foolish idiocy and fall in our knees in worship of their brilliance?

Or will we just think that the haters are idiots just as they think we're idiots?

[Almostfaceman]

iakus wrote...

Almostfaceman wrote...

To me, what Saren said was what Sovereign wanted him to think, becasuse Sovereign was controlling his thoughts.  Sovereign forcibly manipulated Saren into thinking that organics could be saved.  The Collectors were complete husks but the results were the same.  Saren really never had a choice after he'd been exposed to Sovereign for more than a few days.

All right, what are the Reapers after?

To continue the cycle of extinction they have performed uninterrupted for tens of millions of years (at least)

Why?

Their reasons are beyond us (okay, I am willing to table that one until ME 3.  But it better be a doozy)

How?

Manually activate Citadel dark space relay.

For what purpose?

Reapers are waiting at the other end.  Keepers which nomally perform this task no longer respond to Sovereign's signal.  Relay opens, cycle can begin.

Okay, that didn't work.  What's next.

Spend years if not decades kidnapping human colonies

Why?

To build a human Reaper

How?

It's beyond you

For what purpose?

...No data available...

Yes, I get it that the purpose of the Human Reaper in the story not being spelled out yet is bothering you.  It doesn't bother me, for the reasons I've already stated.  No offense, but we're re-treading old ground here.