105 réponses à ce sujet

[Bourne Endeavor]

3) This is a heroic space opera.  I didn't play the first two games so I could ****ing lose in the finale.  Earth destroyed = you lost.  Period.

Essentially what you are in demand for is the de facto champion of the world ending. Shepard is the savior against a malevolent force that threats to push humanity to the brink of annihilation, yet just as all hope is abandoned he discovers the conveniently placed deux ex machina and thwarts their evil! Wow, what a threat those Reapers were. They destroyed England and New York. Oh scary!

No, mate. Earth being destroyed would be a grim bittersweet conclusion but not a loss. We win by ending the cycle regardless of the sacrifice.

This of course pertains to the idea Earth is destroyed and not merely abandoned. If you argue enormous loss of life inevitably leads to Earth's subsequent demise, and thus no astronomical causalities should be allotted, then I find your ideal monotonous, unimaginative and dull. Your typical "Humans win because we're so cool!" storyline that over saturates the market. Humans can win sure, but I would much rather see some severe loss to achieve that victory.

jamesp81 wrote...

Also keep in mind that reaping takes a hell of a long time.  British Sniper Guy in the trailer indicated 9 million dead in the first week.  Killing 10 million a week would take 20 years to kill everyone on Earth, so it's clear that the reaping process isn't exactly like throwing a switch anyway.  If they simply wanted to exterminate the population of Earth, and orbital bombardment could accomplish that in less than 24 hours.

Eh, no not quite. This has been debated beyond death and the overall consensus amongst the fanbase was British Sniper is specifying numbers pertaining only to England. As of 2008, there is an estimated 51,446,000 people populating the country. Even if we presumed these numbers doubled in a two hundred year time span, the Reapers would effectively annihilate England within ten weeks. These statistics follow a constant however, which may prove inaccurate. The Reapers could destroy in a larger quantity, especially as more arrive since we are uncertain of their numbers.

In addition, if every region is experiencing such staggering loses simultaneously, then it would require hardly a year for the complete genocide of Earth.

But hey, Bioware can wipe out Earth if they want.  They can also find someone else to buy their games from now on, as I'll be done with them.  I won't even have to buy ME3 to learn if the ending is unacceptable to me.  I'm sure I can dig up that info on these very forums before I take out the debit card.

No offense mate however I imagine they couldn't care less. You would be among a vastly small minority who could not overcome a dislike of a very realistic probability that Earth does not always win. Frankly, a scenario like what that article insinuates would attract more interest due to the sheer rarity of the story angle.

Modifié par Bourne Endeavor, 24 mai 2011 - 06:11 .

[CroGamer002]

jamesp81 wrote...

Mesina2 wrote...

If Earth is empty then why would Reapers still be there?

Short answer: they wouldn't.  They'd be moving on to the next world due for a reaping.

Exactly.

Earth won't be empty.
There will be still few billions souls left, I'm sure.

[noxsachi]

I really hope that Earth is destroyed and or in some way rendered inhospitable. I had liked that in general ME stayed away from the OMG HUMANS ARE SO SPESHUL shtick and I'm not looking forward to Earth being the pivotal point in the galaxy wide reaper invasion. If it gets destroyed then I would have some respect for Bioware taking us to Earth.

And yes chalk me up as someone hoping for a phyrric ending. They failed at making the Collectors compelling antagonists with how easy the 'suicide mission' was, I better not be able to defeat reapers without at least half the galaxy in flames.

Modifié par noxsachi, 24 mai 2011 - 06:11 .

[jamesp81]

Eh, no not quite. This has been debated beyond death and the overall
consensus amongst the fanbase was British Sniper is specifying numbers
pertaining only to England.

I've seen those debates, and I remain unconvinced.  This is doubly true in light of the things Vigil said near the end of ME1 on the time frame for a Reaping.  It took centuries to complete, and that's including the use of indoctrinated spies to undermine holdout systems.  Every single hard, canonical fact provided in all ME games tells us that reaping takes a very long damned time, even with the apparent numbers the Reapers have on their side.

As for Bioware, it's not particularly relevant to me if they care about me spending my money on the game or not.  I do not spend money on products I'm not interested in.  Opinions of others in that decision are not considered.

[jamesp81]

Bourne Endeavor wrote...

3) This is a heroic space opera.  I didn't play the first two games so I could ****ing lose in the finale.  Earth destroyed = you lost.  Period.

Essentially what you are in demand for is the de facto champion of the world ending. Shepard is the savior against a malevolent force that threats to push humanity to the brink of annihilation, yet just as all hope is abandoned he discovers the conveniently placed deux ex machina and thwarts their evil! Wow, what a threat those Reapers were. They destroyed England and New York. Oh scary!

No, mate. Earth being destroyed would be a grim bittersweet conclusion but not a loss. We win by ending the cycle regardless of the sacrifice.

This of course pertains to the idea Earth is destroyed and not merely abandoned. If you argue enormous loss of life inevitably leads to Earth's subsequent demise, and thus no astronomical causalities should be allotted, then I find your ideal monotonous, unimaginative and dull. Your typical "Humans win because we're so cool!" storyline that over saturates the market. Humans can win sure, but I would much rather see some severe loss to achieve that victory.

jamesp81 wrote...

Also keep in mind that reaping takes a hell of a long time.  British Sniper Guy in the trailer indicated 9 million dead in the first week.  Killing 10 million a week would take 20 years to kill everyone on Earth, so it's clear that the reaping process isn't exactly like throwing a switch anyway.  If they simply wanted to exterminate the population of Earth, and orbital bombardment could accomplish that in less than 24 hours.

Eh, no not quite. This has been debated beyond death and the overall consensus amongst the fanbase was British Sniper is specifying numbers pertaining only to England. As of 2008, there is an estimated 51,446,000 people populating the country. Even if we presumed these numbers doubled in a two hundred year time span, the Reapers would effectively annihilate England within ten weeks. These statistics follow a constant however, which may prove inaccurate. The Reapers could destroy in a larger quantity, especially as more arrive since we are uncertain of their numbers.

In addition, if every region is experiencing such staggering loses simultaneously, then it would require hardly a year for the complete genocide of Earth.

But hey, Bioware can wipe out Earth if they want.  They can also find someone else to buy their games from now on, as I'll be done with them.  I won't even have to buy ME3 to learn if the ending is unacceptable to me.  I'm sure I can dig up that info on these very forums before I take out the debit card.

No offense mate however I imagine they couldn't care less. You would be among a vastly small minority who could not overcome a dislike of a very realistic probability that Earth does not always win. Frankly, a scenario like what that article insinuates would attract more interest due to the sheer rarity of the story angle.

Also, the poll I ran on this very forum suggests that your opinion remains in the minority by a factor of about two to one.

It's likely ME3 will have an "epic fail" ending like ME2 did, but I doubt it will be the canon ending.  Unless, of course, Bioware wants to fail as hard as Blizzard sometimes does with its storytelling.

[CroGamer002]

jamesp81 wrote...

Bzzt.  Wrong on every count.

1) Earth destroyed in any way is a grim ending


2) I damned well won't buy it.  Bioware is not entitled to my money, they gotta earn it just the same as everyone else.

3) This is a heroic space opera.  I didn't play the first two games so I could ****ing lose in the finale.  Earth destroyed = you lost.  Period.

Well one of the endings should be grim.

Also Earth is gonna be anhilated no matter what, there's gonna be grim moments in ME3.

4) This has been discussed at greath length.  If you wipe out Earth's population, humanity as a major player in the galaxy is finished.  Most of the colonies will likely be conquered by batarians or similar thug regimes in short order, as they do not, on their own, have the ability to defend themselves. 99% of the human race in ME lives on Earth.  Destroy Earth and you destroy mankind.  The remaining survivors might continue to linger in a twilight existence as batarian slaves, but humanity would be finished as anyone that mattered.

False.

By the end of Ice Age there were only 10 000 humans and that's more then enough for race to survive.

Death of Earth is not death of humanity, but it will make humanity extremely weaken it.



Also Alliance is part of the Council, they'll have some help from them to defend at least some key colonies.

But I'm sure Earth won't be completely destroyed in ME3. Genocide is very long process.

[aimlessgun]

jamesp81 wrote...
As for Bioware, it's not particularly relevant to me if they care about me spending my money on the game or not.  I do not spend money on products I'm not interested in.  Opinions of others in that decision are not considered.

Yeah, pretty much. I'll lobby for what I want, you'll lobby for what you want, and I certainly hope I win 

[Confused-Shepard]

jamesp81 wrote...

vanslyke85 wrote...

jamesp81 wrote...

Bourne Endeavor wrote...

I will praise BioWare like no tomorrow if they tempt what few companies in this industry dare even consider; the destruction or abandonment of Earth.

Going to need a source though mate otherwise you are merely posting jibberish.

And I, on the other hand, won't buy their game.

And that's what Bioware does: sell games.  Most people are not interested in storytelling with dark, grim endings.  If I wanted a bunch hipster grimdark storytelling, I can get it from a Blizzard game.  They can keep this kind of crap away from the ME universe.

I'd be fine with it if we temporarily abandoned Earth, but retook it at the end of ME3 with the population moving back in.  The problem I see with that is that there's simply no way there's enough spacelift capacity to evacuate billions of people.  Hell, the Quarian Migrant Fleet has 50,000 starships in it and it only houses 17 million Quarians in overcrowded conditions.

Just because the earth is abandoned doesn't mean it's going to be a dark grim ending.  We could colonize a new world after shep kicks some reaper ass.  in the mass effect universe, anything is possible.  as if you won't buy the game.

Bzzt.  Wrong on every count.

1) Earth destroyed in any way is a grim ending

1. So? Big whoop! Vulcan was destroyed in STAR TREK but the ending was still positive. They can do a whole speech about how humans are tough and will survive. Grim does not mean bad.

2) I damned well won't buy it.  Bioware is not entitled to my money, they gotta earn it just the same as everyone else.

2. I am sure Bioware will feel the pain of losing 60 dollars

3) This is a heroic space opera.  I didn't play the first two games so I could ****ing lose in the finale.  Earth destroyed = you lost.  Period.

3. Um no! It would be a tragic end to the series but the only way anyone would lose is if the Reapers destroy everyone and everything. Even if humans went extinct, it won't mean we lost the battle. Reapers Destroyed =  Victory. A Phyrric Victory is still a Victory. Go back to Disney Cartoons if you want rainbows & sunshine

4) This has been discussed at greath length.  If you wipe out Earth's population, humanity as a major player in the galaxy is finished.  Most of the colonies will likely be conquered by batarians or similar thug regimes in short order, as they do not, on their own, have the ability to defend themselves. 99% of the human race in ME lives on Earth.  Destroy Earth and you destroy mankind.  The remaining survivors might continue to linger in a twilight existence as batarian slaves, but humanity would be finished as anyone that mattered.

4. More like 70-80% but that's besisdes the point. It would be a dark turn of events but humans would manage to keep going. During the Ice Age there were only 10,000 of us in a harsh winter climate. If we lived through that then one million of us in a super advanced future can easily survive and the aliens would owe it to us.  

Hey! Somebody get the big baby a pacifier! 
Even in the best ending I want to see Earth in flames. 
C'mon Bioware! Humans aren't special. We're just another species of rat in the galactic rat race 

Modifié par Confused-Shepard, 24 mai 2011 - 06:23 .

[CroGamer002]

Confused-Shepard wrote...


4. More like 70-80% but that's besisdes the point. It would be a dark turn of events but humans would manage to keep going. During the Ice Age there were only 10,000 of us in a harsh winter climate. If we lived through that then one million of us in a super advanced future can easily survive and the aliens would owe it to us.  

No, it is 99%.

Humanity is colonizing worlds for only 50 years.

I doubt number of humans outside of Earth is even near half of billion.

[jamesp81]

Mesina2 wrote...

jamesp81 wrote...

Bzzt.  Wrong on every count.

1) Earth destroyed in any way is a grim ending


2) I damned well won't buy it.  Bioware is not entitled to my money, they gotta earn it just the same as everyone else.

3) This is a heroic space opera.  I didn't play the first two games so I could ****ing lose in the finale.  Earth destroyed = you lost.  Period.

Well one of the endings should be grim.

Also Earth is gonna be anhilated no matter what, there's gonna be grim moments in ME3.

4) This has been discussed at greath length.  If you wipe out Earth's population, humanity as a major player in the galaxy is finished.  Most of the colonies will likely be conquered by batarians or similar thug regimes in short order, as they do not, on their own, have the ability to defend themselves. 99% of the human race in ME lives on Earth.  Destroy Earth and you destroy mankind.  The remaining survivors might continue to linger in a twilight existence as batarian slaves, but humanity would be finished as anyone that mattered.

False.

By the end of Ice Age there were only 10 000 humans and that's more then enough for race to survive.

Death of Earth is not death of humanity, but it will make humanity extremely weaken it.



Also Alliance is part of the Council, they'll have some help from them to defend at least some key colonies.

But I'm sure Earth won't be completely destroyed in ME3. Genocide is very long process.

I tend to disagree.  While 10,000 humans can make a viable breeding population, the colonies wont' be able to defend themselves from elements like the batarians.  Humanity would be reduced to a twilight kind of existence as slaves and drifters.

The Alliance would almost certainly lose its council seat once it was unable to provide significant resources to the council.  As the Turian said, "being on the Council implies that a race can handle its own problems, and assist other race's with theirs."  Furthermore, as for humanity's colonies being invaded, I'm sure the council will, once again, "regret that it cannot become involved in a purely human matter."

Destruction of Earth's population means slavery or a migratory existence at best.  Extinction is also possible.  The batarians might love to have human slaves, but they really have a chip on their shoulder where humanity is concerned, so extermination is possible.

I would expect that ME3 will have a non-canonical "epic fail" ending like ME2 did.  That's not a problem for me.  These other issues are.

Modifié par jamesp81, 24 mai 2011 - 06:31 .

[jamesp81]

Confused-Shepard wrote...

jamesp81 wrote...

vanslyke85 wrote...

jamesp81 wrote...

Bourne Endeavor wrote...

I will praise BioWare like no tomorrow if they tempt what few companies in this industry dare even consider; the destruction or abandonment of Earth.

Going to need a source though mate otherwise you are merely posting jibberish.

And I, on the other hand, won't buy their game.

And that's what Bioware does: sell games.  Most people are not interested in storytelling with dark, grim endings.  If I wanted a bunch hipster grimdark storytelling, I can get it from a Blizzard game.  They can keep this kind of crap away from the ME universe.

I'd be fine with it if we temporarily abandoned Earth, but retook it at the end of ME3 with the population moving back in.  The problem I see with that is that there's simply no way there's enough spacelift capacity to evacuate billions of people.  Hell, the Quarian Migrant Fleet has 50,000 starships in it and it only houses 17 million Quarians in overcrowded conditions.

Just because the earth is abandoned doesn't mean it's going to be a dark grim ending.  We could colonize a new world after shep kicks some reaper ass.  in the mass effect universe, anything is possible.  as if you won't buy the game.

Bzzt.  Wrong on every count.

1) Earth destroyed in any way is a grim ending

1. So? Big whoop! Vulcan was destroyed in STAR TREK but the ending was still positive. They can do a whole speech about how humans are tough and will survive. Grim does not mean bad.

2) I damned well won't buy it.  Bioware is not entitled to my money, they gotta earn it just the same as everyone else.

2. I am sure Bioware will feel the pain of losing 60 dollars

3) This is a heroic space opera.  I didn't play the first two games so I could ****ing lose in the finale.  Earth destroyed = you lost.  Period.

3. Um no! It would be a tragic end to the series but the only way anyone would lose is if the Reapers destroy everyone and everything. Even if humans went extinct, it won't mean we lost the battle. Reapers Destroyed =  Victory. A Phyrric Victory is still a Victory. Go back to Disney Cartoons if you want rainbows & sunshine

4) This has been discussed at greath length.  If you wipe out Earth's population, humanity as a major player in the galaxy is finished.  Most of the colonies will likely be conquered by batarians or similar thug regimes in short order, as they do not, on their own, have the ability to defend themselves. 99% of the human race in ME lives on Earth.  Destroy Earth and you destroy mankind.  The remaining survivors might continue to linger in a twilight existence as batarian slaves, but humanity would be finished as anyone that mattered.

4. More like 70-80% but that's besisdes the point. It would be a dark turn of events but humans would manage to keep going. During the Ice Age there were only 10,000 of us in a harsh winter climate. If we lived through that then one million of us in a super advanced future can easily survive and the aliens would owe it to us.  

Hey! Somebody get the big baby a pacifier! 
Even in the best ending I want to see Earth in flames. 
C'mon Bioware! Humans aren't special. We're just another species of rat in the galactic rat race 

Victory is meaningless if everything you fought for is gone.

[Bourne Endeavor]

jamesp81 wrote...

I've seen those debates, and I remain unconvinced.  This is doubly true in light of the things Vigil said near the end of ME1 on the time frame for a Reaping.  It took centuries to complete, and that's including the use of indoctrinated spies to undermine holdout systems.  Every single hard, canonical fact provided in all ME games tells us that reaping takes a very long damned time, even with the apparent numbers the Reapers have on their side.

As for Bioware, it's not particularly relevant to me if they care about me spending my money on the game or not.  I do not spend money on products I'm not interested in.  Opinions of others in that decision are not considered.

Vigil was describing the destruction of all galactic civilization, not a single isolated planet. A better comparison would be how swift and efficiency the Citadel was lost since Earth will be only scarcely better prepared for the coming invasion. The decades to follow would see the Reapers seek out the remaining home worlds.

Disregarding that think back to Soverign. One Reaper by its lonesome decimated the entire Citadel fleet and was only defeated when the Alliance arrived, although they to suffered significant loss. Had the derelict Reaper awoken, then the galaxy was doomed. Two Reapers would have been sufficient. We now have an opposition exceeding two hundred and a sizable portion are targeting Earth. That fire power could arguably be equated to present day governments launching nuclear missiles upon one another and documentation suggests if they ever did, it would leave the targeted regions nigh inhabitable.

The planet does not have to be destroyed completely but a significant portion ought to be.

jamesp81 wrote...
Also, the poll I ran on this very forum suggests that your opinion remains in the minority by a factor of about two to one.

It's likely ME3 will have an "epic fail" ending like ME2 did, but I doubt it will be the canon ending.  Unless, of course, Bioware wants to fail as hard as Blizzard sometimes does with its storytelling.

That is cute mate, really. I dug around to locate your poll and you accumulated a merger 87 votes, in addition, of that number only 63% chose "Earth Saved." Thus, unless your estimation of the ME fanbase is fifty five people, your poll results are baseless. Regardless, Internet polls always are, otherwise I could dig up a few that claim Final Fantasy is superior to Mass Effect.

Modifié par Bourne Endeavor, 24 mai 2011 - 06:35 .

[jamesp81]

Mesina2 wrote...

Confused-Shepard wrote...


4. More like 70-80% but that's besisdes the point. It would be a dark turn of events but humans would manage to keep going. During the Ice Age there were only 10,000 of us in a harsh winter climate. If we lived through that then one million of us in a super advanced future can easily survive and the aliens would owe it to us.  

No, it is 99%.

Humanity is colonizing worlds for only 50 years.

I doubt number of humans outside of Earth is even near half of billion.

And this is easily verified by simply reading the codex entries on humanity's oldest and largest colonies.  The actual figure might put Earth at representing 97% of the human population, but that's a lowball estimate.  It is, most likely, somewhere between 98% and 99.9%.

This is all assuming Bioware doesn't do a massive retcon, of course.

[Leonia]

What makes you so sure the batarians won't also be wiped out? Shepard has done a lot to make humanity relevant and important to the Council, they would probably help out after the victory against the Reapers. Besides, humanity has allies like the turians to help out against batarians. Nobody likes the batarians, remember? Everyone will be licking their wounds after the war, I doubt things will go back to normal any time soon (including batarian slavers).

The one thing humanity has always been good at, in pretty much every sci-fi ever written, is bouncing back when it looks like they are about to go extinct. Resilience is our strongest defining characteristic.

[vanslyke85]

we've been trying to save the galaxy as a whole. thats what this game's been about. maybe for life to continue the earth must be sacrificed and the other council races allow us the time and give us the protection needed to regain a large population on a new homeworld elsewhere and among other species home worlds. after all, without humans they'd all be paste.

[jamesp81]

Bourne Endeavor wrote...

jamesp81 wrote...

I've seen those debates, and I remain unconvinced.  This is doubly true in light of the things Vigil said near the end of ME1 on the time frame for a Reaping.  It took centuries to complete, and that's including the use of indoctrinated spies to undermine holdout systems.  Every single hard, canonical fact provided in all ME games tells us that reaping takes a very long damned time, even with the apparent numbers the Reapers have on their side.

As for Bioware, it's not particularly relevant to me if they care about me spending my money on the game or not.  I do not spend money on products I'm not interested in.  Opinions of others in that decision are not considered.

Vigil was describing the destruction of all galactic civilization, not a single isolated planet. A better comparison would be how swift and efficiency the Citadel was lost since Earth will be only scarcely better prepared for the coming invasion. The decades to follow would see the Reapers seek out the remaining home worlds.

Disregarding that think back to Soverign. One Reaper by its lonesome decimated the entire Citadel fleet and was only defeated when the Alliance arrived, although they to suffered significant loss. Had the derelict Reaper awoken, then the galaxy was doomed. Two Reapers would have been sufficient. We now have an opposition exceeding two hundred and a sizable portion are targeting Earth. That fire power could arguably be equated to present day governments launching nuclear missiles upon one another and documentation suggests if they ever did, it would leave the targeted regions nigh inhabitable.

The planet does not have to be destroyed completely but a significant portion ought to be.

jamesp81 wrote...
Also, the poll I ran on this very forum suggests that your opinion remains in the minority by a factor of about two to one.

It's likely ME3 will have an "epic fail" ending like ME2 did, but I doubt it will be the canon ending.  Unless, of course, Bioware wants to fail as hard as Blizzard sometimes does with its storytelling.

That is cute mate, really. I dug around to locate your poll and you accumulated a merger 87 votes, in addition, of that number only 63% chose "Earth Saved." Thus, unless your estimation of the ME fanbase is fifty five people, your poll results are baseless. Regardless, Internet polls always are, otherwise I could dig up a few that claim Final Fantasy is superior to Mass Effect.

Vigil's information supports my claim.

Centuries upon centuries to exterminate all life in a galaxy where every single planet is accessible by mass relay and a short FTL jump, at most.  The entire system is optimized to reduce the time a reaping takes to its minimum and it STILL takes centuries.  It's reasonable to assume from Vigil's descriptions that it could easily take months at the minimum, and decades at the maximum, to properly reap a high population world.  My own personal wild assed guess (or should I used wild arsed guess in your case?) is that it'd take a year, maybe two, for a hugely populated world to be reaped (as opposed to simple destruction, which could be accomplished in less than a day).

[jamesp81]

leonia42 wrote...

What makes you so sure the batarians won't also be wiped out? Shepard has done a lot to make humanity relevant and important to the Council, they would probably help out after the victory against the Reapers. Besides, humanity has allies like the turians to help out against batarians. Nobody likes the batarians, remember? Everyone will be licking their wounds after the war, I doubt things will go back to normal any time soon (including batarian slavers).

The one thing humanity has always been good at, in pretty much every sci-fi ever written, is bouncing back when it looks like they are about to go extinct. Resilience is our strongest defining characteristic.

I have no faith in the council's benevolence.  They have never gone out of their way to help, even after saving their sorry assed lives in ME1.

The batarians may or may not get completely wiped out by the reapers.  I was honestly using them as the obvious example more than anything.  Unless the galaxy completely loses, there will still be lawless bands of slavers and pirates running around who will happily prey on relatively defenseless human colony worlds.  I have no reason to believe the council would lift a damned finger to stop them, given past actions.

If you went renegade and chose the human council, its likely the entire system would collapse anyway from distrust, leaving us where we were before.  Or the Reapers would kill them, which I honestly wouldn't be too sorry about.

[jamesp81]

elektrego wrote...

The ca...non is a lie!

All possible endings are equally valid and I, for one, would appreciate an empty world kind of ending, as one possibilty.
Maybe you can ask for a toggle at the beginning of the game that allows you to disable "bad" endings, because it offends your personal taste; this is kind of a popular course of action these days...

That's not entirely accurate, even though Bioware likes to say it a lot.  In ME2, Shepard can die.  Since he can die in ME2, does that mean the whole of ME3 invalid since you play as Shepard in ME3?

ME3 is entirely based on the idea that the epic fail ending of ME2 didn't actually happen and that, if you got it, that you'd simply replay the game so that you didn't get that ending, and thus continue on to play ME3.

I'm fine with dark and gritty.  I'm not fine with tragic endings.  I get enough tragic endings in real life, I spend money on entertainment to avoid that sort of thing, especially when it's presented on a much grander scale.

Modifié par jamesp81, 24 mai 2011 - 06:58 .

[CroGamer002]

jamesp81 wrote...


I tend to disagree.  While 10,000 humans can make a viable breeding population, the colonies wont' be able to defend themselves from elements like the batarians.  Humanity would be reduced to a twilight kind of existence as slaves and drifters.

Alliance will still have enough flee to defend at least few colonies by themeself even if Earth is destroyed.

The Alliance would almost certainly lose its council seat once it was unable to provide significant resources to the council.  As the Turian said, "being on the Council implies that a race can handle its own problems, and assist other race's with theirs."  Furthermore, as for humanity's colonies being invaded, I'm sure the council will, once again, "regret that it cannot become involved in a purely human matter."

If you don't know, even alien homeworlds will be invaded.
So Council races will have to take care of each other for civilizations to survive.

Destruction of Earth's population means slavery or a migratory existence at best.  Extinction is also possible.  The batarians might love to have human slaves, but they really have a chip on their shoulder where humanity is concerned, so extermination is possible.

Even if Earth is destroyed, that won't happen.
Alliance space is still big and even if pirates have no resistance, it would take years to get every human colony for their slavery.

[jamesp81]

Arcian wrote...

jamesp81 wrote...

If I wanted a bunch hipster grimdark storytelling, I can get it from a Blizzard game.

Hahahaha, are you serious? Blizzard is grimdark?

Hyenacackle.gif

Yes, they are, as a matter of fact.  The most recent Starcraft game, Wings of Liberty, is a very notable exception to their norm.  I fully expect the next two in that trilogy to revert back to their norm for storytelling, however.

Starcraft is listed on tvtropes as an example of the Crapsack World trope, after all, for a good reason.

Modifié par jamesp81, 24 mai 2011 - 06:56 .

[jamesp81]

Mesina2 wrote...

jamesp81 wrote...


I tend to disagree.  While 10,000 humans can make a viable breeding population, the colonies wont' be able to defend themselves from elements like the batarians.  Humanity would be reduced to a twilight kind of existence as slaves and drifters.

Alliance will still have enough flee to defend at least few colonies by themeself even if Earth is destroyed.

The Alliance would almost certainly lose its council seat once it was unable to provide significant resources to the council.  As the Turian said, "being on the Council implies that a race can handle its own problems, and assist other race's with theirs."  Furthermore, as for humanity's colonies being invaded, I'm sure the council will, once again, "regret that it cannot become involved in a purely human matter."

If you don't know, even alien homeworlds will be invaded.
So Council races will have to take care of each other for civilizations to survive.

Destruction of Earth's population means slavery or a migratory existence at best.  Extinction is also possible.  The batarians might love to have human slaves, but they really have a chip on their shoulder where humanity is concerned, so extermination is possible.

Even if Earth is destroyed, that won't happen.
Alliance space is still big and even if pirates have no resistance, it would take years to get every human colony for their slavery.

If Earth falls and it is apparent that it's going to be lost completely, I don't see any of the Alliance fleet surviving.  At some point, the remaining fleet launches a last ditch suicidal assault in which the fleet either retakes Earth or dies trying.  Most of the human race is from Earth, ergo, most of the military personnel are drawn from Earth.  They will, undoubtedly, do this if a solution that saves Earth is not found.  I just don't see any of the Alliance fleet surviving otherwise.  In fact, the idea that the Alliance fleet would retreat from Earth at all is stretching things a little, but I can still see it without breaking immersion.

Why would it take lawless bands years to simply occupy every colony?  It's not as if they don't know where those colonies are located.  They aren't Reapers, they don't have to take time to smoothie everyone, after all.

[Jedi Master of Orion]

I thought the upbeat ending of Star Trek XI even though Vulcan was destroyed was utterly ridiculous.

At the same time though, humanity losing Earth isn't all that unheard of is it? It happened in Supreme Commander. Humanity could conceivably endure afterward, and sentient life surviving is really the most important victory Shepard should be hoping for.

I don't really have any problem with losing Earth. Or at least losing much of it. I think that if Earth is annihilated though, then humanity may never recover the strength it once had. AT least not for many many generations. If they do drive humans to the brink of extinction, I don't know if it would guarantee that the survivors would be wiped out or enslaved but it should mark the end of their reign a s major power.

[Leonia]

Actually, the Alliance has its headquarters at Arcturus Station, which is NOT in the Sol system.

I'm sorry, but as someone who enjoys BSG and saw how the remnants of humanity managed to survive near exitinction when their equivalent of Earth was destroyed, I find it hard to believe that things would be any different here. Especially when there are alien races to help us out. If you don't trust the Council or the rest of the species, that's your business but I think you'll find that every species will be in a similar situation in ME3 and cooperation will be the key to everyone's survival.

If you don't want to spend money on a game where Earth doesn't survive, that's your business. I think it's silly to want the usual, standard ending though. This is why we can't have nice things, nobody ever wants to try anything new.