1198 réponses à ce sujet

[Iakus]

squee913 wrote...

Another good example is the argument that Shepard would never join Cerberus because if you were the sole survivor, they killed your squad.

Your argument is invalid because you could have been a war hero. If we are going to start doing that, we can debate almost any decision in the game...

The arguement isn't that SHepard would never join with Cerberus.  Or rather, it shouldn't be.  The arguement is that SHepard seems to grow an acute case of amnesia regarding Akuze and Cerberus' involvement with it.  This blind sdpot is especially noticeable if Shepard is a Sole Survivor, since was a receipient of one of their mad scientist experiments.  The fact that it takes a DLC character to mention it to SHepard is...troubling...

[Mister Ford]

Anacronian Stryx wrote...

piemanz wrote...

Autoclave wrote...

Instead of human reaper, they could've made Collectors gather humans just for creating an army of husks.

Sure, they could have made an army of husks instead, but for whatever reason, makng a human reaper was obviously more important to them or they would indeed have made an army of husks instead.

I think many people suspects that the Reaper Larvae was important to put in the end because then they had something big to fight and go boom at the end of the game..and nothing more than that.

I never got the impression that the human reaper was central to the Reaper's overall plan, and I'm not sure why so many people have jumped to that conclusion.  Didn't EDI suggest that they tried and failed to create a reaper from the protheans?  It makes sense that would try with humans as well.  But I don't think their plans to carry out this current cycle of destruction hinged on whether or not the human reaper was created.  I always assumed they were seeing if they could create a new one with this new species they're encountering for the first time.

Modifié par Mister Ford, 04 avril 2011 - 03:08 .

[squee913]

iakus wrote...

squee913 wrote...

Another good example is the argument that Shepard would never join Cerberus because if you were the sole survivor, they killed your squad.

Your argument is invalid because you could have been a war hero. If we are going to start doing that, we can debate almost any decision in the game...

The arguement isn't that SHepard would never join with Cerberus.  Or rather, it shouldn't be.  The arguement is that SHepard seems to grow an acute case of amnesia regarding Akuze and Cerberus' involvement with it.  This blind sdpot is especially noticeable if Shepard is a Sole Survivor, since was a receipient of one of their mad scientist experiments.  The fact that it takes a DLC character to mention it to SHepard is...troubling...

Please forgive. I did not mean to give the impression that I believed that previous argument. I was using it to show the flaw in logic.

[Mister Ford]

iakus wrote...

squee913 wrote...

Another good example is the argument that Shepard would never join Cerberus because if you were the sole survivor, they killed your squad.

Your argument is invalid because you could have been a war hero. If we are going to start doing that, we can debate almost any decision in the game...

The arguement isn't that SHepard would never join with Cerberus.  Or rather, it shouldn't be.  The arguement is that SHepard seems to grow an acute case of amnesia regarding Akuze and Cerberus' involvement with it.  This blind sdpot is especially noticeable if Shepard is a Sole Survivor, since was a receipient of one of their mad scientist experiments.  The fact that it takes a DLC character to mention it to SHepard is...troubling...

The Alliance doesn't believe in the Reapers, nor does the Council  There is one group still doing something to fight them. With the fate of the galaxy in the balance, I'd hope Shepard would temporarily put aside past grievances and take advantage of the only resources he has available to him. But maybe you want him to put his personal grudges above saving all organic life in the galaxy.

Modifié par Mister Ford, 04 avril 2011 - 03:12 .

[Iakus]

Mister Ford wrote...


The Alliance doesn't believe in the Reapers, nor does the Council  There is one group still doing something to fight them. With the fate of the galaxy in the balance, I'd hope Shepard would temporarily put aside past grievances and take advantage of the only resources he has available to him. But maybe you want him to put his personal grudges above saving all organic life in the galaxy.

The arguement isn't that Shepard would never join with Cerberus.  Or rather, it shouldn't be.  The arguement is that Shepard seems to grow an acute case of amnesia regarding Akuze and Cerberus' involvement with it.  This blind spot is especially noticeable if Shepard is a Sole Survivor, since was a receipient of one of their mad scientist experiments.  The fact that it takes a DLC character to mention it to Shepard is...troubling

[squee913]

[quote]Mister Ford wrote...

[quote]Anacronian Stryx wrote...

[quote]piemanz wrote...

[quote]Autoclave wrote...

Instead of human reaper, they could've made Collectors gather humans just for creating an army of husks.[/quote]


Sure, they could have made an army of husks instead, but for whatever reason, makng a human reaper was obviously more important to them or they would indeed have made an army of husks instead.

[/quote]

I think many people suspects that the Reaper Larvae was important to put in the end because then they had something big to fight and go boom at the end of the game..and nothing more than that. [/quote]

After playing Arrival I completely agree. I feel more like it was simply one of the projects the reapers were doing. Simply a plan that might help make the conquest easier, but not the main plan. Some people will complain that this makes ME2 pointless filler. I disagree, mainly because I think the point of the game was to build your relationship with the team and the universe you are supposed to save. Think LOTR Two Towers. The whole second book was about dealing with Sauroman. He was a threat to be sure, but he was not Sauron main force. If Sauroman was simply a tool that could make the conquest easier, and wiping him out did not stop the main invasion. Still, I don't think it was pointless to take him out.

I never got the impression that the human reaper was central to the Reaper's overall plan, and I'm not sure why so many people have jumped to that conclusion.  Didn't EDI suggest that they tried and failed to create a reaper from the protheans?  It makes sense that would try with humans as well.  But I don't think their plans to carry out this current cycle of destruction hinged on whether or not the human reaper was created.  I always assumed they were seeing if they could create a new one with this new species they're encountering for the first time.

Modifié par squee913, 04 avril 2011 - 03:19 .

[Whatever42]

We know that Shepard was recovered intact because we saw it. We know that he was exposed to vaccuum because we're told. We see Shepard's dead tissue. We know that Shepard was seen falling toward the planet. We know that his helmet was found on the planet.

I would say that a reasonable conclusion was that he was found on the planet. I would say that an unreasonable conclusion was that he was saved by pixies.

However, Koop, now we have you adding in facts not in evidence. We have you saying that the body could not be found intact - which we have seen - because Shepard would have burned up. This is the same as saying he was saved by pixies. We have no evidence of him burning up.

You draw on real life physics that he would burn up but you are assuming that he was travelling at a very high velocity, which again you have no evidence. You are inventing narrative in an attempt to prove a plothole.You say that a body would have not been able to survive the fall intact. Yet people have not only had their bodies survive great falls intact but have even lived with minor injuries from amazing heights.

If you are going to contradict clear facts in the game, you can't do so with unsupported supposition and invented facts.

But ultimately, that's not really what I'm talking about. I think Shepard being ressurected is a plothole just as I think Saren not destroying the beacons and the Thorian is a plothole. What most of my argument is against is silly stuff like saying that not mining the Omega IV relay is a plothole. In that instance, to claim it is a plothole means seriously inventing narrative.

[Almostfaceman]

JKoopman wrote...

You mistake me. I'm not saying that he makes fantastical leaps of logic by inventing narrative to explain Shepard's resurrection. I'm saying that he's making fantastical leaps of logic by somehow connecting one's desire for exposition on major unexplained plot points with a desire for exposition on things as trivial and irrelevant as why Shepard doesn't stop to go to the bathroom on his way to the bridge or the aforementioned unexplained bag of groceries on the counter; hence the "where you presume that..." part that you opted not to include in your quote.

I can only speculate on why you would seemingly intentionally take me out of context like that.

Intentions are difficult to judge face-to-face let alone in text on a message board.  I picked what I thought was appropriate in your post to make my post.  Nothing more, nothing less.  All I was trying to ask for was some perspective, for cooler heads.  It certainly wasn't an insult and I will never consider it insulting for postulating that a point may have been reached where people can agree to disagree.  Please do not take offense.

[HappyHappyJoyJoy]

Whatever666343431431654324 wrote...
found intact - which we have seen - because Shepard would have burned up. This is the same as saying he was saved by pixies. We have no evidence of him burning up.

You draw on real life physics that he would burn up but you are assuming that he was travelling at a very high velocity, which again you have no evidence. You are inventing narrative in an attempt to prove a plothole.You say that a body would have not been able to survive the fall intact. Yet people have not only had their bodies survive great falls intact but have even lived with minor injuries from amazing heights.

So we have a useful case here of a person named Joseph Kittinger who jumped out of a balloon at 102K feet back in 1960.  His peak velocity as he fell - before he deployed a parachute - was over 600 MPH.

I'm sorry, even Assault Armor ain't gonna help you at that speed.

You can go use a handy calculator to determine terminal velocity.

This is ignoring how fast the body hit the atmosphere or what angle it was at. 

[Almostfaceman]

HappyHappyJoyJoy wrote...

Whatever666343431431654324 wrote...
found intact - which we have seen - because Shepard would have burned up. This is the same as saying he was saved by pixies. We have no evidence of him burning up.

You draw on real life physics that he would burn up but you are assuming that he was travelling at a very high velocity, which again you have no evidence. You are inventing narrative in an attempt to prove a plothole.You say that a body would have not been able to survive the fall intact. Yet people have not only had their bodies survive great falls intact but have even lived with minor injuries from amazing heights.

So we have a useful case here of a person named Joseph Kittinger who jumped out of a balloon at 102K feet back in 1960.  His peak velocity as he fell - before he deployed a parachute - was over 600 MPH.

I'm sorry, even Assault Armor ain't gonna help you at that speed.

You can go use a handy calculator to determine terminal velocity.

This is ignoring how fast the body hit the atmosphere or what angle it was at. 

Is it impossible (and I'm not being snarky) that the suit Shepard is wearing has air brake technology, like parachutes?  I don't think it is.  That the helmet is intact and not burned to little bits (ditto for Shepard) tells us the fall was slow enough for him not to burn up.

[xboxlivegamer]

Smudboy was an idiot. I disagree with him on almost all his points. He never once offered a point on how to make Mass Effect 2 a better game overall, but a better game for him. I'm good with complexity in games but what he wants is too complex and more akin to a sim than an RPG. 

Also he's kinda beating the dead horse here seeing as the game has been out for over a year now. He should be offering suggestions for Mass Effect 3 rather than fixes for 2, and even that is pointless as the game is pretty much complete by now.

Modifié par xboxlivegamer, 04 avril 2011 - 03:52 .

[Iakus]

Almostfaceman wrote...

Is it impossible (and I'm not being snarky) that the suit Shepard is wearing has air brake technology, like parachutes?  I don't think it is.  That the helmet is intact and not burned to little bits (ditto for Shepard) tells us the fall was slow enough for him not to burn up.

Given the ther stuff Shepard's armor is supposed to have in it, I am willing to go along with the possibility that there was some gizmo in there or other that allowed his body to still be (mostly) intact when the planet smacked into him.  It's a stretch, but I can hold my nose and go along with it for the sake of moving the story along.

Restoring his mind is another story.  Reassembling a brain, the condition of his corpse kinda fades into the background against that.

[Anacronian Stryx]

Mister Ford wrote...

I never got the impression that the human reaper was central to the Reaper's overall plan, and I'm not sure why so many people have jumped to that conclusion.  Didn't EDI suggest that they tried and failed to create a reaper from the protheans?  It makes sense that would try with humans as well.  But I don't think their plans to carry out this current cycle of destruction hinged on whether or not the human reaper was created.  I always assumed they were seeing if they could create a new one with this new species they're encountering for the first time.

I think that this comes simpel desire, People like the game so they want it to be important.

Take The Empire Strikes Back, This much beloved sequel does almost nothing to move the overall plot(Overthrowing the Empire) except Luke acquire training from Yoda, Plot Wise it could be almost completely removed from the trilogy though it would be rare to find anybody who thinks that it's not "important". 

[Bamboozalist]

I wonder what Shepard's kinetic barrier did when he/she hit the ground.

[HappyHappyJoyJoy]

Almostfaceman wrote...

HappyHappyJoyJoy wrote...

Whatever666343431431654324 wrote...
found intact - which we have seen - because Shepard would have burned up. This is the same as saying he was saved by pixies. We have no evidence of him burning up.

You draw on real life physics that he would burn up but you are assuming that he was travelling at a very high velocity, which again you have no evidence. You are inventing narrative in an attempt to prove a plothole.You say that a body would have not been able to survive the fall intact. Yet people have not only had their bodies survive great falls intact but have even lived with minor injuries from amazing heights.

So we have a useful case here of a person named Joseph Kittinger who jumped out of a balloon at 102K feet back in 1960.  His peak velocity as he fell - before he deployed a parachute - was over 600 MPH.

I'm sorry, even Assault Armor ain't gonna help you at that speed.

You can go use a handy calculator to determine terminal velocity.

This is ignoring how fast the body hit the atmosphere or what angle it was at. 

Is it impossible (and I'm not being snarky) that the suit Shepard is wearing has air brake technology, like parachutes?  I don't think it is.  That the helmet is intact and not burned to little bits (ditto for Shepard) tells us the fall was slow enough for him not to burn up.

I suppose it is.  It seems like a pretty weird thing to have installed in armor - compared to extra ammo capacity or shields or any of the other upgrades we can get.  Plus you'd have to rely on hitting a planet where the atmosphere wasn't too thick (to avoid burning up) or too toxic or a dozen other things, much less being in range of a planet when the ship blew (which is pretty unlikely, space is big.)

If this was something that the writers in ME2 had mentioned - "good thing your N7 armor had that new parachute tech, or you would have been a pancake" - I'd probably shrug and say "whatever, at least you went through the trouble of thinking about what happens when a human body hits a planet."

But this gets back into the problem with "inventing the narrative" - good writers think of this stuff, bad writers make us come up with explanations. 

[HappyHappyJoyJoy]

xboxlivegamer wrote...

Smudboy was an idiot. I disagree with him on almost all his points. He never once offered a point on how to make Mass Effect 2 a better game overall...

Yes, he should have done a series called Fixing Mass Effect or something. 

[Bamboozalist]

Mister Ford wrote...

I never got the impression that the human reaper was central to the Reaper's overall plan, and I'm not sure why so many people have jumped to that conclusion.  Didn't EDI suggest that they tried and failed to create a reaper from the protheans?  It makes sense that would try with humans as well.  But I don't think their plans to carry out this current cycle of destruction hinged on whether or not the human reaper was created.  I always assumed they were seeing if they could create a new one with this new species they're encountering for the first time.

^This, this so hard. ME1 ended with the game basically telling us the Reapers were still coming so I had always assumed that ment they either had another way or were simply flying there. I never thought of the Human Reaper as anything more than an experiment not a new vanguard and when Harbinger says that we have changed nothing I always just asumed he meant that humanity is still going to get harvested even though they have to do it a different way because we killed the Collectors.

[HappyHappyJoyJoy]

Anacronian Stryx wrote...

I think that this comes simpel desire, People like the game so they want it to be important.

Take The Empire Strikes Back, This much beloved sequel does almost nothing to move the overall plot(Overthrowing the Empire) except Luke acquire training from Yoda, Plot Wise it could be almost completely removed from the trilogy though it would be rare to find anybody who thinks that it's not "important". 

?  TESC has a ton of stuff integral to the plot of the series.  Not just Luke's training to be a Jedi, but his first confrontation with Vader; the first hint that Vader is not just a stooge for the Emperor; Leia and Han's relationship; the increasing grip that the Empire is trying to excise on planets and their reactions; etc.

[Iakus]

Bamboozalist wrote...

I wonder what Shepard's kinetic barrier did when he/she hit the ground.

Given his suit was poked full of holes, it's doubtful it was even functioning.  Assuming it was, probably instantly overloaded, since I doubt they're specced to protect soldiers from planetary collisions.

[xboxlivegamer]

HappyHappyJoyJoy wrote...

xboxlivegamer wrote...

Smudboy was an idiot. I disagree with him on almost all his points. He never once offered a point on how to make Mass Effect 2 a better game overall...

Yes, he should have done a series called Fixing Mass Effect or something. 

You clearly didn't bother reading a single word passed that. Most of what he suggest as improvements were based on his own opinion and not something practical that would actually make the game better.

[Iakus]

Bamboozalist wrote...


^This, this so hard. ME1 ended with the game basically telling us the Reapers were still coming so I had always assumed that ment they either had another way or were simply flying there. I never thought of the Human Reaper as anything more than an experiment not a new vanguard and when Harbinger says that we have changed nothing I always just asumed he meant that humanity is still going to get harvested even though they have to do it a different way because we killed the Collectors.

Which brings up the question:  Why now?  WHy tip their hand about the Collectors and the Omega IV Relay?  Grab a few humans and experiment on them, fine.  But hundreds of tthousands of humans?  Whole colonies?  Why not wait a few years when a fleet of Reapers is having its way with the galaxy?  It's almost like it's a conflict tailor- made for Shepard to be brought back to life so he can build a team of the bestest bad****es in the galaxy and while away the time until the real threat gets here

[Bamboozalist]

HappyHappyJoyJoy wrote...

?  TESC has a ton of stuff integral to the plot of the series.  Not just Luke's training to be a Jedi, but his first confrontation with Vader; the first hint that Vader is not just a stooge for the Emperor; Leia and Han's relationship; the increasing grip that the Empire is trying to excise on planets and their reactions; etc.

Yes it did but that's because characters also = plot. The 2nd chapter of a trilogy/saga is usually more focused on character development. Part 1 - Intro and establishes story - Part 2 - Character focus, story doesn't really progress - Part 3 - Resolution.

The overall "story" of Star Wars didn't change very much in TESB. It basically maintained the status quo, Rebels on the run the Empire still large and in charge, it showed how little the Rebellion truly did with the destruction of the Death Star and how powerful the Empire still was. So if we apply Mass Effect Rage Logic to it, TESB was a crappy movie because it made the first one seem pointless because the Empire was still as powerful as they were before the destruction of the Death Star. We don't **** about it because we liked the character development and focus that TESB was all about.

ME2 was about getting attached to your squad, as of right now we don't know if ME2 was pointless because we don't know what's going to happen to that squad in ME3.

If your entire squad gets killed off or cameod = ME2 is pointless
If the squad comes back either as your squad or as a meaningful part of the story to where that connection can be built upon = ME2 was not pointless.

Modifié par Bamboozalist, 04 avril 2011 - 04:15 .

[HappyHappyJoyJoy]

xboxlivegamer wrote...

HappyHappyJoyJoy wrote...

xboxlivegamer wrote...

Smudboy was an idiot. I disagree with him on almost all his points. He never once offered a point on how to make Mass Effect 2 a better game overall...

Yes, he should have done a series called Fixing Mass Effect or something. 

You clearly didn't bother reading a single word passed that. Most of what he suggest as improvements were based on his own opinion and not something practical that would actually make the game better.

I disagree.  I didn't like all of his ideas, but I thought some of them were clever and could have helped patch some of the more egregious plot holes, and were entirely practical (like making the beacons important and thus Shepard important because of his unique ability to understand Prothean.)

[Anacronian Stryx]

Almostfaceman wrote...


Is it impossible (and I'm not being snarky) that the suit Shepard is wearing has air brake technology, like parachutes?  I don't think it is.  That the helmet is intact and not burned to little bits (ditto for Shepard) tells us the fall was slow enough for him not to burn up.

It's not impossible, But the game never tells us that anything like that nor does it ever show us such tech being used in similar circumstances or ever reference such tech is the norm. 

And no this is not a "every little detail must be explained" - But when a story's protagonist gets dropped from outer space and into a planet Players/Audience/Readers wants to know how he didn't get burned to little bits, It is a obvious question to ask and it is the storytellers job to explain it.

Imagine this, If Titanic was a fictional story and you saw the film, Suddenly the ship starts sinking, You don't see the ship hitting the iceberg and nobody explains that it did... it just sinks, Wouldn't you be confused?   

[xboxlivegamer]

HappyHappyJoyJoy wrote...

xboxlivegamer wrote...

HappyHappyJoyJoy wrote...

xboxlivegamer wrote...

Smudboy was an idiot. I disagree with him on almost all his points. He never once offered a point on how to make Mass Effect 2 a better game overall...

Yes, he should have done a series called Fixing Mass Effect or something. 

You clearly didn't bother reading a single word passed that. Most of what he suggest as improvements were based on his own opinion and not something practical that would actually make the game better.

I disagree.  I didn't like all of his ideas, but I thought some of them were clever and could have helped patch some of the more egregious plot holes, and were entirely practical (like making the beacons important and thus Shepard important because of his unique ability to understand Prothean.)

Since when has the beacon not been important?