6494 réponses à ce sujet

[Bourne Endeavor]

dreman9999 wrote...

Who ever said you have to invent a narritive? In any plot or story to understand what is going on you needto know the characters, why they are doing thing and how the do it. Like in Hamlet, you understand why hamlet wants revenge on his uncle and why he doesn't take revege sooner to understand the plot. It's 101 of liturature.

Alright, question time.

• Why was Harbinger building a human-Repeaer?
• What could it do that a regular engineered robot or ship made of Reaper tech cannot?
• Why did Harbinger turn off his ship, allow Shepard on board, steal data to determine the location of their secret base... then ambush her?
• Why didn't Harbinger destroy the Normandy in lieu of abducting the crew, dooming any chance Shepard had?
• Why was Harbinger perfectly content killing Shepard initially, only to later want to abduct her?
• Why is VS a complete moron on Horizon?

There is many more but the point was made. The only thing we know about Harbinger, is he is consistently a moron, who is ironically inconstant. Somewhat amusing when you think about it.

Modifié par Bourne Endeavor, 07 septembre 2011 - 09:39 .

[Lotion Soronarr]

Someone With Mass wrote...

And if people understood video game story 101, then we wouldn't have smug pricks trying to be bashing and entertaining at the same time, while failing at it something fierce.

They wouldn't have you?

[dreman9999]

Lotion Soronnar wrote...

dreman9999 wrote...
Who ever said you have to invent a narritive? In any plot or story to understand what is going on you needto know the characters, why they are doing thing and how the do it. Like in Hamlet, you understand why hamlet wants revenge on his uncle and why he doesn't take revege sooner to understand the plot. It's 101 of liturature.

If you understood the 101 of literature, you wouldn't be defending ME2 bad writing.

I'm defending ME2 writingbecause I can see clearly the people don't understand the plot. For one, smudboy thinking that Shepard was revived to face the collectors and him not understand why TIM revived Shepard insteadof making an army with no understand to how to take down a reaper.

[Notlikeyoucare]

Someone With Mass wrote...

And if people understood video game story 101, then we wouldn't have smug pricks trying to be bashing and entertaining at the same time, while failing at it something fierce.

WTF is "video game story 101" ? Writing has its own standards regardless of the medium. The fact that it is a video game makes it no more or less vunerable to critisism.

[Notlikeyoucare]

DP.

Modifié par Notlikeyoucare, 07 septembre 2011 - 09:40 .

[Someone With Mass]

Notlikeyoucare wrote...

WTF is "video game story 101" ? Writing has its own standards regardless of the medium. The fact that it is a video game makes it no more or less vunerable to critisism.

Sorry to tell you this, but a video game needs to be written in a different way than a movie, since it's interactive and the characters can change based on the player's preference. In a movie, you have no control over the characters whatsoever.

[Lotion Soronarr]

Bourne Endeavor wrote...

dreman9999 wrote...

Who ever said you have to invent a narritive? In any plot or story to understand what is going on you needto know the characters, why they are doing thing and how the do it. Like in Hamlet, you understand why hamlet wants revenge on his uncle and why he doesn't take revege sooner to understand the plot. It's 101 of liturature.

Alright, question time.

• Why was Harbinger building a human-Repeaer?
• What could it do that a regular engineered robot or ship made of Reaper tech cannot?
• Why did Harbinger turn off his ship, allow Shepard on board, steal data to determine the location of their secret base... then ambush her?
• Why didn't Harbinger destroy the Normandy in lieu of abducting the crew, dooming any chance Shepard had?
• Why was Harbinger perfectly content killing Shepard initially, only to later want to abduct her?
• Why is VS a complete moron on Horizon?

There is many more but the point was made. The only thing we know about Harbinger, is he is consistently a moron, who is ironically inconstant. Somewhat amusing when you think about it.

[Bourne Endeavor]

Someone With Mass wrote...

Bourne Endeavor wrote...

• There is no mention of the genophage throughout that clip, at least not the one where Casay talks about the gameplay.
• It has yet to be confirmed if Cerberus is indoctrinated or why the are attacking Shepard.
• Who cares about the numbers she can create? They still have to grow and the Reapers can destroy planets in far less the amount of time.
• You continuously avoid answering what the other Reapers are doing, unless you presume all three hundred are at Earth.
• Unless you have documented fact; a statement from BioWare solidifying your argument (No a demo doesn't count) You are speculating.

And you're running on speculation too, since you say that there are only three hundred Reapers, which we have no solid way of knowing.

That last cutscene don't count, since there could be Reapers outside the shot.

Aww, isn't that cute. You cherry pick the one post where I neglect to write "estimated" or another variation of the term.

Never said there was not more (exlcuding that one post) nor did I actually deny I was speculating, although I am glad you basically supported my point. My argument was dreamer has been claiming speculation as fact, when he has no basis by which to do so.

Modifié par Bourne Endeavor, 07 septembre 2011 - 09:47 .

[Notlikeyoucare]

Bourne Endeavor wrote...

dreman9999 wrote...

Who ever said you have to invent a narritive? In any plot or story to understand what is going on you needto know the characters, why they are doing thing and how the do it. Like in Hamlet, you understand why hamlet wants revenge on his uncle and why he doesn't take revege sooner to understand the plot. It's 101 of liturature.

Alright, question time.


[*]Why was Harbinger building a human-Repeaer?
[*]What could it do that a regular engineered robot or ship made of Reaper tech cannot?
[*]Why did Harbinger turn off his ship, allow Shepard on board, steal data to determine the location of their secret base... then ambush her?
[*]Why didn't Harbinger destroy the Normandy in lieu of abducting the crew, dooming any chance Shepard had?
[*]Why was Harbinger perfectly content killing Shepard initially, only to later want to abduct her?
[*]Why is VS a complete moron on Horizon?[/list]
There is many more but the point was made. The only thing we know about Harbinger, is he is consistently a moron, who is ironically inconstant. Somewhat amusing when you think about it.

[*]THAT annoyed me to no end. My jaw was on the floor and I was like "WHAT THE %&^&^  !? WHY DIDN'T YOU JUST BLOW THE ^&*%ING THING UP!?

[Lotion Soronarr]

dreman9999 wrote...

Lotion Soronnar wrote...

dreman9999 wrote...
Who ever said you have to invent a narritive? In any plot or story to understand what is going on you needto know the characters, why they are doing thing and how the do it. Like in Hamlet, you understand why hamlet wants revenge on his uncle and why he doesn't take revege sooner to understand the plot. It's 101 of liturature.

If you understood the 101 of literature, you wouldn't be defending ME2 bad writing.

I'm defending ME2 writingbecause I can see clearly the people don't understand the plot. For one, smudboy thinking that Shepard was revived to face the collectors and him not understand why TIM revived Shepard insteadof making an army with no understand to how to take down a reaper.

You're the one to talk....

The revival of Shepard is stupid beyond words.
Sicne when does Shep know how to take down the reapers? He ends ME1 trying to find a way. He ends ME2 still not knowing how to stop them.

[Lotion Soronarr]

Someone With Mass wrote...

Sorry to tell you this, but a video game needs to be written in a different way than a movie, since it's interactive and the characters can change based on the player's preference. In a movie, you have no control over the characters whatsoever.

The basis of good, cohesive writing reamin the same...

[Someone With Mass]

Bourne Endeavor wrote...

Alright, question time.

• Why was Harbinger building a human-Repeaer?
• What could it do that a regular engineered robot or ship made of Reaper tech cannot?
• Why did Harbinger turn off his ship, allow Shepard on board, steal data to determine the location of their secret base... then ambush her?
• Why didn't Harbinger destroy the Normandy in lieu of abducting the crew, dooming any chance Shepard had?
• Why was Harbinger perfectly content killing Shepard initially, only to later want to abduct her?
• Why is VS a complete moron on Horizon?

There is many more but the point was made. The only thing we know about Harbinger, is he is consistently a moron, who is ironically inconstant. Somewhat amusing when you think about it.

1 & 2 haven't been answered. Yet.

3. Harbinger didn't count on EDI. Villains can't plan for everything.

4. Joker stopped them before they were done.

5. People's plans can change, believe it or not. Harbinger is perfectly fine with killing Shepard at any time, since they want to study the body. They have apparently no problem with it being damaged. I assume that they can work their tech magic on it to get what they want.

6. The VS was always a moron in my opinion.

Modifié par Someone With Mass, 07 septembre 2011 - 09:52 .

[Notlikeyoucare]

Someone With Mass wrote...

Notlikeyoucare wrote...

WTF is "video game story 101" ? Writing has its own standards regardless of the medium. The fact that it is a video game makes it no more or less vunerable to critisism.

Sorry to tell you this, but a video game needs to be written in a different way than a movie, since it's interactive and the characters can change based on the player's preference. In a movie, you have no control over the characters whatsoever.

And a game can be a linear experience with predetermined characters, dialouge, and events. They can, and have, been done well. The fact that I can choose option A or option B of dialouge is no excuse for sloppy writing. Period.

[InfoGuy101]

Lotion Soronnar wrote...

dreman9999 wrote...

Lotion Soronnar wrote...

dreman9999 wrote...
Who ever said you have to invent a narritive? In any plot or story to understand what is going on you needto know the characters, why they are doing thing and how the do it. Like in Hamlet, you understand why hamlet wants revenge on his uncle and why he doesn't take revege sooner to understand the plot. It's 101 of liturature.

If you understood the 101 of literature, you wouldn't be defending ME2 bad writing.

I'm defending ME2 writingbecause I can see clearly the people don't understand the plot. For one, smudboy thinking that Shepard was revived to face the collectors and him not understand why TIM revived Shepard insteadof making an army with no understand to how to take down a reaper.

You're the one to talk....

The revival of Shepard is stupid beyond words.
Sicne when does Shep know how to take down the reapers? He ends ME1 trying to find a way. He ends ME2 still not knowing how to stop them.

Well Reapers tend to blow up when he's/she's around lol. Maybe he's/she's like a lucky rabbits foot or something when it comes to destroying Reapers lol. 

Modifié par InfoGuy101, 07 septembre 2011 - 09:54 .

[dreman9999]

Bourne Endeavor wrote...

dreman9999 wrote...

Who ever said you have to invent a narritive? In any plot or story to understand what is going on you needto know the characters, why they are doing thing and how the do it. Like in Hamlet, you understand why hamlet wants revenge on his uncle and why he doesn't take revege sooner to understand the plot. It's 101 of liturature.

Alright, question time.

• Why was Harbinger building a human-Repeaer?
  
  
• What could it do that a regular engineered robot or ship made of Reaper tech cannot?
  
  
• Why did Harbinger turn off his ship, allow Shepard on board, steal data to determine the location of their secret base... then ambush her?
  
  
• Why didn't Harbinger destroy the Normandy in lieu of abducting the crew, dooming any chance Shepard had?
  
  
• Why was Harbinger perfectly content killing Shepard initially, only to later want to abduct her?
  
  
• Why is VS a complete moron on Horizon?

There is many more but the point was made. The only thing we know about Harbinger, is he is consistently a moron, who is ironically inconstant. Somewhat amusing when you think about it.

1.Because they want to turn humanity into a reaper...Aka, they wanted to make humanity better.

[*]2.Your not understanding the goal of making the human reaper or when it would have been finished....It is ment to be humaity turned into a reaper and it was going to be finished after the reaper invasion on earth.

[*]3.It was a trap. It was ment toisolatedshepard and hack his ship. Note that Shepard is placed on a platform that is assened in the air. The only way down was to fall off...If edi was not there. The collector trap fail because they did not know edi or an AI at EDI'S level was on the normady.

[*]4.Bacause Joker unlocked EDI and escape. If your asking why the ship was not point blank destoryed on sight, it's clear they wanted to get as much info on the peole trying to stop them...Aka Cerberus. Also, to use the crew towards the reaper. It clear they don't want to destory humanity, they want to make it better.

[*]5.Because they can also, revive her died body, too. Via Like Saren.

[*]6.Bacause of cerberus history...http://masseffect.wi...ssiers/Cerberus. Clearly they are not good people.

Modifié par dreman9999, 07 septembre 2011 - 09:55 .

[Someone With Mass]

Notlikeyoucare wrote...

And a game can be a linear experience with predetermined characters, dialouge, and events. They can, and have, been done well. The fact that I can choose option A or option B of dialouge is no excuse for sloppy writing. Period.

It always boils down to "sloppy writing".

Give me one game that's completely free of inconsistencies.

[Notlikeyoucare]

Someone With Mass wrote...

Notlikeyoucare wrote...

And a game can be a linear experience with predetermined characters, dialouge, and events. They can, and have, been done well. The fact that I can choose option A or option B of dialouge is no excuse for sloppy writing. Period.

It always boils down to "sloppy writing".

Give me one game that's completely free of inconsistencies.

There isn't one that I can think of. However, not every story is littered with them. It isn't all these stories are. In Uncharted 2 for example, there are a few inconsistencies, but NONE undermind the plot.

Flynn magically appearing on the train is an inconsistency but it doesn't alter the way the story would have played it if it was abolished.

The contrived way they find the temple is annoying but, it doesn't alter the plot since they know what direction it is in,

The fact that the Mp40 works in the ice cave is contrived for gameplay but doesn't alter the way the story would have played out since Mp40 didn't damage the Guardian.

The plot develops naturally while Mass Effect 2 does not.

Pans Labrynth is also an excellent example.

[Bourne Endeavor]

Someone With Mass wrote...

Bourne Endeavor wrote...

Alright, question time.

• Why was Harbinger building a human-Repeaer?
• What could it do that a regular engineered robot or ship made of Reaper tech cannot?
• Why did Harbinger turn off his ship, allow Shepard on board, steal data to determine the location of their secret base... then ambush her?
• Why didn't Harbinger destroy the Normandy in lieu of abducting the crew, dooming any chance Shepard had?
• Why was Harbinger perfectly content killing Shepard initially, only to later want to abduct her?
• Why is VS a complete moron on Horizon?

There is many more but the point was made. The only thing we know about Harbinger, is he is consistently a moron, who is ironically inconstant. Somewhat amusing when you think about it.

1 & 2 haven't been answered. Yet.

3. Harbinger didn't count on EDI. Villains can't plan for everything.

4. Joker stopped them before they were done.

5. People's plans can change, believe it or not. Harbinger is perfectly fine with killing Shepard at any time, since they want to study the body. They have apparently no problem with it being damaged. I assume that they can work their tech magic on it to get what they want.

6. The VS was always a moron in my opinion.

• Exactly, and it either needed to be explained or acknowledged as a mystery by the characters. Neither of these scenarios takes place, EDI simply states it is a Reaper, Shepard adds in the human part and... nothing.
• No, but this can ambush you before you reach their computer system or even better, not let you board their ship in the first place. There was never any reason for the rationality behind this, excluding the writers needing to move the plot forward. Now it could have been a phenomenal twist if Harbinger allowed all this, then destroyed the Normandy, ridding Shepard of EDI, a ship and the IFF. That would have made him a genius, but alas he was not.
• How about they don't board at all and just start shooting? The Normandy was a sitting duck.
• They want to study the body yet go about it by destroying the Normandy in the opening scene of the game, then make no attempt whatsoever to collect the remains (as illogical and impossible it was there would be any)? The follow up response is, why study Shepard? What benefit was she to them?
• Then you must have been elated on Horizon.

Modifié par Bourne Endeavor, 07 septembre 2011 - 10:08 .

[dreman9999]

Bourne Endeavor wrote...

Someone With Mass wrote...

Bourne Endeavor wrote...

Alright, question time.

• Why was Harbinger building a human-Repeaer?
  
• What could it do that a regular engineered robot or ship made of Reaper tech cannot?
  
• Why did Harbinger turn off his ship, allow Shepard on board, steal data to determine the location of their secret base... then ambush her?
  
• Why didn't Harbinger destroy the Normandy in lieu of abducting the crew, dooming any chance Shepard had?
  
• Why was Harbinger perfectly content killing Shepard initially, only to later want to abduct her?
  
• Why is VS a complete moron on Horizon?

There is many more but the point was made. The only thing we know about Harbinger, is he is consistently a moron, who is ironically inconstant. Somewhat amusing when you think about it.

1 & 2 haven't been answered. Yet.

3. Harbinger didn't count on EDI. Villains can't plan for everything.

4. Joker stopped them before they were done.

5. People's plans can change, believe it or not. Harbinger is perfectly fine with killing Shepard at any time, since they want to study the body. They have apparently no problem with it being damaged. I assume that they can work their tech magic on it to get what they want.

6. The VS was always a moron in my opinion.

• Exactly, and it either needed to be explained or acknowledged as a mystery by the characters. Neither of these scenarios takes place, EDI simply states it is a Reaper, Shepard adds in the human part and... nothing.
  
• No, but this can ambush you before you reach their computer system or even better, not let you board their ship in the first place. There was never any reason for the rationality behind this, excluding the writers needing to move the plot forward. Now it could have been a phenomenal twist if Harbinger allowed all this, then destroyed the Normandy, ridding Shepard of EDI, a ship and the IFF. That would have made him a genius, but alas he was not.
  
• How about they don't board at all and just start shooting? The Normandy was a sitting duck.
  
• They want to study the body yet go about it by destroying the Normandy in the opening scene of the game, then make no attempt whatsoever to collect the remains (as illogical and impossible it was there would be any)? The follow up response is, why study Shepard? What benefit was she to them?
  
• Then you must have been elated on Horizon.

I guess I have to post this agein...
[*]1.Because they want to turn humanity into a reaper...Aka, they wanted to make humanity better.



2.Your not understanding the goal of making the human reaper or when it would have been finished....It is ment to be humaity turned into a reaper and it was going to be finished after the reaper invasion on earth.



3.It was a trap. It was ment toisolatedshepard and hack his ship. Note that Shepard is placed on a platform that is assened in the air. The only way down was to fall off...If edi was not there. The collector trap fail because they did not know edi or an AI at EDI'S level was on the normady.



4.Bacause Joker unlocked EDI and escape. If your asking why the ship was not point blank destoryed on sight, it's clear they wanted to get as much info on the peole trying to stop them...Aka Cerberus. Also, to use the crew towards the reaper. It clear they don't want to destory humanity, they want to make it better.



5.Because they can also, revive her died body, too. Via Like Saren.

[*]6.Bacause of cerberus history...http://masseffect.wi...ssiers/Cerberus. Clearly they are not good people.

[Someone With Mass]

Bourne Endeavor wrote...

• Exactly, and it either needed to be explained or acknowledged as a mystery by the characters. Neither of these scenarios takes place, EDI simply states it is a Reaper, Shepard adds in the human part and... nothing.
• No, but this can ambush you before you reach their computer system or even better, not let you board their ship in the first place. There was never any reason for the rationality behind this, excluding the writers needing to move the plot forward. Now it could have been a phenomenal twist if Harbinger allowed all this, then destroyed the Normandy, ridding Shepard of EDI, a ship and the IFF. That would have made him a genius, but alas he was not.
• How about they don't board at all and just start shooting? The Normandy was a sitting duck.
• They want to study the body yet go about it by destroying the Normandy in the opening scene of the game, then make no attempt whatsoever to collect the remains (as illogical and impossible it was there would be any)? The follow up response is, why study Shepard? What benefit was she to them?
• Then you must have been elated on Horizon.

I really hate the quoting system, so I'm doing another list.

1. Well, it's acknowledge as an abomination. I don't think you can add much mystery to...that thing.

2. That would've been indeed a great move, but it would've also left Shepard stranded with no way through the Omega 4 relay, which would pretty much be a "CRITICAL MISSION FAILURE".

3. Maybe they saw an opportunity to grab Shepard and his crew, but they weren't there, so they decided to take his crew (the crew is human after all) and then blow the ship up, but Joker stopped them and then escaped.

4. They wanted to check the Cipher and the Prothean beacons' effects on his/her mind, which is something that was oddly enough cut from the game.

5. Indeed. 

[Anacronian Stryx]

Man there's a whole lot of fans going around making up explanations that the story it self should have provided.

[Someone With Mass]

Anacronian Stryx wrote...

Man there's a whole lot of fans going around making up explanations that the story it self should have provided.

Yeah, because I don't want to think for myself. That makes my brain hurt.

/sarcasm

[dreman9999]

dreman9999 wrote...

Bourne Endeavor wrote...

Someone With Mass wrote...

Bourne Endeavor wrote...

Alright, question time.

• Why was Harbinger building a human-Repeaer?
  
  
• What could it do that a regular engineered robot or ship made of Reaper tech cannot?
  
  
• Why did Harbinger turn off his ship, allow Shepard on board, steal data to determine the location of their secret base... then ambush her?
  
  
• Why didn't Harbinger destroy the Normandy in lieu of abducting the crew, dooming any chance Shepard had?
  
  
• Why was Harbinger perfectly content killing Shepard initially, only to later want to abduct her?
  
  
• Why is VS a complete moron on Horizon?

There is many more but the point was made. The only thing we know about Harbinger, is he is consistently a moron, who is ironically inconstant. Somewhat amusing when you think about it.

1 & 2 haven't been answered. Yet.

3. Harbinger didn't count on EDI. Villains can't plan for everything.

4. Joker stopped them before they were done.

5. People's plans can change, believe it or not. Harbinger is perfectly fine with killing Shepard at any time, since they want to study the body. They have apparently no problem with it being damaged. I assume that they can work their tech magic on it to get what they want.

6. The VS was always a moron in my opinion.

• Exactly, and it either needed to be explained or acknowledged as a mystery by the characters. Neither of these scenarios takes place, EDI simply states it is a Reaper, Shepard adds in the human part and... nothing.
  
  
• No, but this can ambush you before you reach their computer system or even better, not let you board their ship in the first place. There was never any reason for the rationality behind this, excluding the writers needing to move the plot forward. Now it could have been a phenomenal twist if Harbinger allowed all this, then destroyed the Normandy, ridding Shepard of EDI, a ship and the IFF. That would have made him a genius, but alas he was not.
  
  
• How about they don't board at all and just start shooting? The Normandy was a sitting duck.
  
  
• They want to study the body yet go about it by destroying the Normandy in the opening scene of the game, then make no attempt whatsoever to collect the remains (as illogical and impossible it was there would be any)? The follow up response is, why study Shepard? What benefit was she to them?
  
  
• Then you must have been elated on Horizon.

I guess I have to post this agein...

[*]1.Because they want to turn humanity into a reaper...Aka, they wanted to make humanity better.



2.Your not understanding the goal of making the human reaper or when it would have been finished....It is ment to be humaity turned into a reaper and it was going to be finished after the reaper invasion on earth.



3.It was a trap. It was ment toisolatedshepard and hack his ship. Note that Shepard is placed on a platform that is assened in the air. The only way down was to fall off...If edi was not there. The collector trap fail because they did not know edi or an AI at EDI'S level was on the normady.



4.Bacause Joker unlocked EDI and escape. If your asking why the ship was not point blank destoryed on sight, it's clear they wanted to get as much info on the peole trying to stop them...Aka Cerberus. Also, to use the crew towards the reaper. It clear they don't want to destory humanity, they want to make it better.



5.Because they can also, revive her died body, too. Via Like Saren.


[*]6.Bacause of cerberus history...http://masseffect.wi...ssiers/Cerberus. Clearly they are not good people.

So no ones going to acknowlge my post explaining the details Bourne Endeavor brought up?

[Bourne Endeavor]

dreman9999 wrote...

1.Because they want to turn humanity into a reaper...Aka, they wanted to make humanity better.

[*]2.Your not understanding the goal of making the human reaper or when it would have been finished....It is ment to be humaity turned into a reaper and it was going to be finished after the reaper invasion on earth.

[*]3.It was a trap. It was ment toisolatedshepard and hack his ship. Note that Shepard is placed on a platform that is assened in the air. The only way down was to fall off...If edi was not there. The collector trap fail because they did not know edi or an AI at EDI'S level was on the normady.

[*]4.Bacause Joker unlocked EDI and escape. If your asking why the ship was not point blank destoryed on sight, it's clear they wanted to get as much info on the peole trying to stop them...Aka Cerberus. Also, to use the crew towards the reaper. It clear they don't want to destory humanity, they want to make it better.

[*]5.Because they can also, revive her died body, too. Via Like Saren.

[*]6.Bacause of cerberus history...http://masseffect.wi...ssiers/Cerberus. Clearly they are not good people.

• Why humanity, why their abrupt change of objectives? In ME1, Sovereign simply wanted absolute destruction of all galactic civilization. Why, does it need to look human when every other Reaper we have seen looks like a squid?
• You did not answer my question. Why was a human-reaper superior to a traditionally engineered one or a warship filled with Reaper tech? Why utilize a process that is slower and less inefficient?
• No, it was meant to capture Shepard not hack the Normandy. The trap could have been sprung earlier, thus not allowing Shepard or EDI to reach their computer. Remember, Shepard must manually upload the data to EDI or something to this effect. Likewise, how about just abducting another colony, placing fielders out to attract Shepard and ambush her there? Why would it ever be a good idea to disable your ship and allow your nemesis to determine your location of your secret base? What if Shepard decided to simply blow them up? We have Garrus, and thus the Thanix cannon all rearing to go. If Shepard had done that, Harbinger just screwed himself.
• Who cares about Cerberus? The Reaper's objective is to purge the galaxy. Besides if they want to put a dent in Cerberus, killing Shepard, Miranda, EDI and blowing up the Normandy would be one phenomenal way to do it. The Shadow Broker speculated just the former two would cripple Cerberus; Harbinger gets bonus points. They abduct colonies, why waste time on nobodies, some useless aliens and Shepard?
• Oh, now you are making stuff up, fantastic. Ignoring that the plot does not make any reference to this. Saren was fitted with upgrades and already indoctrinated, all to serve a predetermined goal; help Sovereign take manual control of the Citadel. What does controlling Shepard accomplish? There is nothing remotely special about her.
• That does not explain why they immediately claim Cerberus may be behind the Collectors when Shepard came to help, thereby insinuating Cerberus was attacking themselves.

Modifié par Bourne Endeavor, 07 septembre 2011 - 10:36 .

[Anacronian Stryx]

Someone With Mass wrote...

Anacronian Stryx wrote...

Man there's a whole lot of fans going around making up explanations that the story it self should have provided.

Yeah, because I don't want to think for myself. That makes my brain hurt.

/sarcasm

It is not a question of not wanting to think for yourself it is a question of not having to write a the story for the writer, This is not necessary in GOOD stories.