6494 réponses à ce sujet

[Arkitekt]

Yeah we are more or less in the same wavelenght, albeit underlining different things. Do you know where these maths are? I'm slightly curious.

[Fixers0]

Arkitekt wrote...
You were steamrolling here and I was nodding in slight approval until you ended up doing a mistake. The problem with the human reaper isn't its "exposition" or the lack of  "explanation" for it. It was well presented and explained, I can't for the life of me understand this criticism at all. What it really made me go WTF is the arnold image of it, which just made my brain go in unrelated and irrelevant directions and really distracted me from the story. Had it a completely different and original "shape" it would have been better. Perhaps that's what you meant.

What! How exactly?

Why is this thing here?  What's it trying to? How is this all going to work? Liquid Humans? these are all obvious questions raised within the narative that were never anwserd worse, not even adressed, lack the narative didn't want to know anything about this.

The entire concept of  having a giant space terminator triclops use by the Giant evil eldar machine god is utterly baffling to, especially when it doesn't get any kind of exposition or  a purpose within the story,  there wasn't even some for shadowing on it, it just there. it absolutly has no meaning withing the story except for reducing the reapers even further down to cartoonbook villians with their convoluted plans.

So how the heck do you come to the conclusion of it being presented right.

[111987]

Fixers0 wrote...

Arkitekt wrote...
You were steamrolling here and I was nodding in slight approval until you ended up doing a mistake. The problem with the human reaper isn't its "exposition" or the lack of  "explanation" for it. It was well presented and explained, I can't for the life of me understand this criticism at all. What it really made me go WTF is the arnold image of it, which just made my brain go in unrelated and irrelevant directions and really distracted me from the story. Had it a completely different and original "shape" it would have been better. Perhaps that's what you meant.

What! How exactly?

Why is this thing here?  What's it trying to? How is this all going to work? Liquid Humans? these are all obvious questions raised within the narative that were never anwserd worse, not even adressed, lack the narative didn't want to know anything about this.

The entire concept of  having a giant space terminator triclops use by the Giant evil eldar machine god is utterly baffling to, especially when it doesn't get any kind of exposition or  a purpose within the story,  there wasn't even some for shadowing on it, it just there. it absolutly has no meaning withing the story except for reducing the reapers even further down to cartoonbook villians with their convoluted plans.

So how the heck do you come to the conclusion of it being presented right.

Why is it here? Reaper reproduction
What's it trying to do? Be born...
How is this going to work? Millions of humans will be melted down to contribute their genetic material (probably DNA) to the Reaper core.

Why does it look like a human? Because all Reaper cores are based on what species 'made' them. They are then put in similar looking squid shells.

Until we know what the Reaper's ultimate purpose is, you shouldn't judge. Using organics to reproduce could be paramount to their motivations.

However I agree that there was no real foreshadowing for it, so the big reveal falls flat. Also EDI acts like it is common knowledge, so I agree the build-up could have been a lot better.

[dreman9999]

Bourne Endeavor wrote...

Arkitekt wrote...

Fixers0 wrote...

And what exactly is wrong with Smudboy's videos? or at the very least the points he brings up in them.

He makes several points that are:

- either entirely wrong (factually);
- making mountains out of mole hills (petty arguments);
- confusing his own subjective opinions about how the plot should be with objective dogmatic truths about it.

While his video analysis was far from flawless, I am curious upon your definition of "petty arguments." His frustration over the reference to Grunt as a pure organism would qualify in my opinion, however earlier you touched upon Shepard's body being salvageable and spun this in that light. I cannot see how the death of the main character and her abrupt resurrection in the very next scene with no explanation how it was feasible, amounts to a "petty argument." The reason people have made this into a mountain was due to the fact suspension of disbelief drifted into "inventing the narrative" wherein the reader was forced to assume facts the story never provided. Based upon everything we know it is factually inconceivable Cerberus would have found any remains, let alone enough to warrant an essential brain transplant.

A subsequent argument was then made about Shepard never experiencing any surreal moment, expression of emotion upon defying death and so forth. Without this all death became was a marketing gimmick and a cheap thrill BioWare could utilize for weak one liners. No individual, no matter race or personality, would accept being revived akin to how Shepard was railroaded to. They would question every aspect, wonder what they have become. In fact, when Miranda makes mention of a possible brain control device, Shepard merely takes her at her word it was never implemented.

The former is a hand wave, while the latter is simply lack of proper characterization. This results in a poorly defined and hollow character, which is what Shepard is in numerous scenes. She lacks the human element the writers crafted for the squad because they were so convinced too much development might jeopardize the "Shepard is you!" ideology. Coincidently, this is not always consistent, and Shepard does have moments of good character enrichment, regrettably this is usually a rarity.

Ultimately, my main qualm is not that there are plot holes, hand waves and lackluster exposition; for nothing is perfect and I willingly accept this. It is the abundance of them, which finally begun to grind on me. You can overlook a few subtle instances, I could even wave off one of the more egregious ones however after a while, I have to ask. "Did you guys even bother to proof read this?" Frankly, I firmly believe the main plot was always an afterthought, and that Walters is the type to come up with an abundance of ideas over time, which are "cool" and "edgy" yet lacks the foresight to meld them into a cohesive story, hence why the episodic character arcs ranged from good to excellent, while the main plot could hardly pass for mediocrity.

...1.It's an rpg. Doing that would take control out of your role.
2.It would make the game black and white. Bioware wants it to be grey.
3.It will make the reapers look ultametly evil, whih Bioware want then to have a reason to do what they're doing.
4.It's not manditory.
5.This is hard science fiction.
....
Why do people take this guys word as fact when he does not know what the plot direction is?

Modifié par dreman9999, 09 septembre 2011 - 03:18 .

[Arkitekt]

@Fixers

Because I actually played the game while paying attention to what was happening. All of your four questions that you raised there are so easily explained that I won't embarrass you by spoonfeeding you them. As a BSN commenter you should be aware of what is going on about the "human reaper".

IOW, don't blame the writers for your own lack of attention. I didn't even need half of the exposition I was fed inside the game to understand perfectly what it is all about.

A very big difference is to complaint about the form of it. If that's what you mean by "presentation" then I agree with you, arnold is a big nono in presenting the very interesting "thing" that the human reaper is, what it represents in the plot and what it reveals about the reaper's intentions with the organics every 50k years. But that's just a visual distraction to an otherwise well presented concept. If you still don't understand it, give it another try, and try to pay attention without cynical eyes.

Modifié par Arkitekt, 09 septembre 2011 - 03:13 .

[Fixers0]

Why is it here? Reaper reproduction[/quote]

It bet that's it just a plot device to act as an end boss, but go ahead.

[quote]111987 wrote...
What's it trying to do? Be born...[/quote]

Yeah, that exactly what we get from the narative

[quote]111987 wrote...
How is this going to work?
Millions of humans will be melted down to contribute their genetic material (probably DNA) to the Reaper core.[/quote]

Again, How will this work? (of course all under the assumption that what you are saying is correct)

[dreman9999]

Fixers0 wrote...

Arkitekt wrote...
You were steamrolling here and I was nodding in slight approval until you ended up doing a mistake. The problem with the human reaper isn't its "exposition" or the lack of  "explanation" for it. It was well presented and explained, I can't for the life of me understand this criticism at all. What it really made me go WTF is the arnold image of it, which just made my brain go in unrelated and irrelevant directions and really distracted me from the story. Had it a completely different and original "shape" it would have been better. Perhaps that's what you meant.

What! How exactly?

Why is this thing here?  What's it trying to? How is this all going to work? Liquid Humans? these are all obvious questions raised within the narative that were never anwserd worse, not even adressed, lack the narative didn't want to know anything about this.

The entire concept of  having a giant space terminator triclops use by the Giant evil eldar machine god is utterly baffling to, especially when it doesn't get any kind of exposition or  a purpose within the story,  there wasn't even some for shadowing on it, it just there. it absolutly has no meaning withing the story except for reducing the reapers even further down to cartoonbook villians with their convoluted plans.

So how the heck do you come to the conclusion of it being presented right.

1.Arrial is mostly that.
2. Harbiger add to the explination of the reaper as well.
3.It a story with facts and story being added allthe time...Mean it's done and what is not explained will be explained .

Say that want every thing explain to you half way through the story is ignorat to the consept of stories. Your just asking for the ending with out going through the book.

[dreman9999]

[quote]Fixers0 wrote...

Why is it here? Reaper reproduction[/quote]

It bet that's it just a plot device to act as an end boss, but go ahead.

[quote]111987 wrote...
What's it trying to do? Be born...[/quote]

Yeah, that exactly what we get from the narative

[quote]111987 wrote...
How is this going to work?
Millions of humans will be melted down to contribute their genetic material (probably DNA) to the Reaper core.[/quote]

Again, How will this work? (of course all under the assumption that what you are saying is correct)



[/quote]

[/quote]......
To awnser your obviou not stated questions.....Wait for MARCH, 6 2012 for ME3 to come out, which will tell everything about the reapers.

Modifié par dreman9999, 09 septembre 2011 - 03:17 .

[111987]

[quote]Fixers0 wrote...
[quote]111987 wrote...
Why is it here? Reaper reproduction[/quote]

It bet that's it just a plot device to act as an end boss, but go ahead.[/quote]

I think they could have found another way to have a final boss fight. I don't think they'd make something so hugely important to the story just to have a (lame) boss fight.


[quote]Fixers0 wrote...
[quote]111987 wrote...
What's it trying to do? Be born...[/quote]

Yeah, that exactly what we get from the narative[/quote]

Exactly. That's all it was trying to do. It wasn't supposed to be a Plan B to attack the Citadel if that's what you're going at.

[quote]111987 wrote...
How is this going to work?
Millions of humans will be melted down to contribute their genetic material (probably DNA) to the Reaper core.[/quote]

Again, How will this work? (of course all under the assumption that what you are saying is correct)
[/quote]

How will what work? The melting of humans? Chawkwas said little robots melted them down. If you're asking me what it's purpose is or where the goo is, i don't know. Those are questions that will be answered in ME3.

[Arkitekt]

[quote]Fixers0 wrote...

Why is it here? Reaper reproduction[/quote]

It bet that's it just a plot device to act as an end boss, but go ahead.[/quote]

And I bet that you really should just avoid any bets regarding mass effect because you really are bad at this.

No, this "plot device" as you call it was already suggested in mass effect 1 by Soverreign's dialogue in Virmire. (they are here to "harvest us" but not to gather "resources" nor "slaves")

It's such an interesting idea that to call it a plot device is just mind blowingly stupid.

[quote]Again, How will this work? (of course all under the assumption that what you are saying is correct) [/quote]

If you know "how", then you are able to build a Reaper. If not, stop asking asinine questions.

[100k]

Killjoy Cutter wrote...On the subject of the "metaphysical", I'm relieved that we didn't have a "white light and choices" moment or some such cliched, trite nonsense (and yes, that's my opinion).  I'm not sure if that's what Smudboy is demanding, or not, though, to be fair.   I think he's demanding some lit-fic introspection, angst, and navel-gazing from Shep after the fact.  Frankly, I'm glad that Shep gets up, and gets back to work on the problem at hand, instead of spending my game time wangsting over the nature of his/her existence and the meaning of his/her return from the dead or some such crap.  If I wanted that, I'd go read a "great, modern literature" book in which nothing actually happens and the characters are pathetic people.

...are you implying that contemplating revival makes one "pathetic"? Because that's just insulting -- and untrue. 

But you've missed the point of the death issue in ME2. Death becomes belittled. YES -- Shepard is a soldier and should always fight on. No one is arguing against that. But he died! That 100% has to mean something! That isn't arguable. Almost every single story featuring a hero facing a great evil manages to deal with death.

This could have easily been fixed with a handful of characters asking Shepard how he feels about death. Naturally, this being an RPG, Shepard could have responded multiple ways. I'm guessing you'd take a more detached option, showing that your Shepard tries not to think about it/ isn't effected by it -- and that's fine. But there should also be other options for other players.

You cannot belittle death when it is presented in any form of media. Throughout history, millions of stories have managed to explore the struggle between life and death, even if many people don't realize it. Death is the final frontier -- the last immovable object that every being in known existence faces. Shepard survives that transition-- something that no other human has done. Don't you call Shepard pathetic for recognizing that for him, the first enemy that was destroyed was death.

Regarding characterization of Shep, there's only so much that can be done before they take the roleplaying completely out of the game, and just turn it into a "combat game with interactive cinematic experience".  The Sheps in my playthroughs are not the Sheps in anyone else's playthroughs.  My Sheps think what they think, do what they do, and feel what they feel, not what anyone else, at Bioware or elsewhere, says they think, do, and feel.

Yet ME1 had an excellent system in place; have characters occasionally ask questions of Shepard, have other characters make observations about Shepards mental and emotional state (like Shai'ira). These give you more freedom than to do what you want with your Shepard than not giving any options.

[Killjoy Cutter]

111987 wrote...

Fixers0 wrote...

Arkitekt wrote...
You were steamrolling here and I was nodding in slight approval until you ended up doing a mistake. The problem with the human reaper isn't its "exposition" or the lack of  "explanation" for it. It was well presented and explained, I can't for the life of me understand this criticism at all. What it really made me go WTF is the arnold image of it, which just made my brain go in unrelated and irrelevant directions and really distracted me from the story. Had it a completely different and original "shape" it would have been better. Perhaps that's what you meant.

What! How exactly?

Why is this thing here?  What's it trying to? How is this all going to work? Liquid Humans? these are all obvious questions raised within the narative that were never anwserd worse, not even adressed, lack the narative didn't want to know anything about this.

The entire concept of  having a giant space terminator triclops use by the Giant evil eldar machine god is utterly baffling to, especially when it doesn't get any kind of exposition or  a purpose within the story,  there wasn't even some for shadowing on it, it just there. it absolutly has no meaning withing the story except for reducing the reapers even further down to cartoonbook villians with their convoluted plans.

So how the heck do you come to the conclusion of it being presented right.

Why is it here? Reaper reproduction
What's it trying to do? Be born...
How is this going to work? Millions of humans will be melted down to contribute their genetic material (probably DNA) to the Reaper core.

Why does it look like a human? Because all Reaper cores are based on what species 'made' them. They are then put in similar looking squid shells.

Until we know what the Reaper's ultimate purpose is, you shouldn't judge. Using organics to reproduce could be paramount to their motivations.

However I agree that there was no real foreshadowing for it, so the big reveal falls flat. Also EDI acts like it is common knowledge, so I agree the build-up could have been a lot better.

We have EDI's speculation and fan speculation about a lot of the "answers" to what's going on at the Collector Base.  While they make some sense given what we're shown, those answers are still speculative. 

And really, I hope there's more to it than what we are shown by the game in that mission, because what's shown and what we can logically speculate from that information is... less than good, like perhaps the people at Bioware didn't even bother spending a day doing their homework on the basic known science they were butchering. 

[Fixers0]

Arkitekt wrote...

@Fixers

Because I actually played the game while paying attention to what was happening. All of your four questions that you raised there are so easily explained that I won't embarrass you by spoonfeeding you them.As a BSN commenter you should be aware of what is going on about the "human reaper".

IOW, don't blame the writers for your own lack of attention. I didn't even need half of the exposition I was fed inside the game to understand perfectly what it is all about.

A very big difference is to complaint about the form of it. If that's what you mean by "presentation" then I agree with you, arnold is a big nono in presenting the very interesting "thing" that the human reaper is, what it represents in the plot and what it reveals about the reaper's intentions with the organics every 50k years. But that's just a visual distraction to an otherwise well presented concept. If you still don't understand it, give it another try, and try to pay attention without cynical eyes.

And yet you still a haven't told me the reasoning for having a Human shaped robot out of Organic goo.

Let's put a list togheter of what's wrong with this concept:

1. Visually it looked retarded and raises many questions.
2. There is no reason for it being in the narative.
3. The whole liquid human was ridicolous perphaps if it was explored earlier it might have made some sense, but what whe got now was borderline asinine.
4. The whole construction plan and building process is so conveluted and stupid that it won't work.

All the reasoning the plot gave us was EDI with her "essence of a species" which i don't think neither of us understands or what it even means.

And this sums it up pretty nicely- From about 06:30

www.youtube.com/watch

ALSO, the biggest problem with this very reveal is the lack of context or meaning that's it has in the story, again it's just there, Narative: don't ask questions, this is what the Reapers are doing. Second to that is the melting humans down into this giant Robot thing, which doesn't even need an explanation.  

AND, i'm no longer discussing i stated my reasons based on observations from the game, that should be enough.

Modifié par Fixers0, 09 septembre 2011 - 03:50 .

[Killjoy Cutter]

100k wrote...

Killjoy Cutter wrote...On the subject of the "metaphysical", I'm relieved that we didn't have a "white light and choices" moment or some such cliched, trite nonsense (and yes, that's my opinion).  I'm not sure if that's what Smudboy is demanding, or not, though, to be fair.   I think he's demanding some lit-fic introspection, angst, and navel-gazing from Shep after the fact.  Frankly, I'm glad that Shep gets up, and gets back to work on the problem at hand, instead of spending my game time wangsting over the nature of his/her existence and the meaning of his/her return from the dead or some such crap.  If I wanted that, I'd go read a "great, modern literature" book in which nothing actually happens and the characters are pathetic people.

...are you implying that contemplating revival makes one "pathetic"? Because that's just insulting -- and untrue. 

But you've missed the point of the death issue in ME2. Death becomes belittled. YES -- Shepard is a soldier and should always fight on. No one is arguing against that. But he died! That 100% has to mean something! That isn't arguable. Almost every single story featuring a hero facing a great evil manages to deal with death.

This could have easily been fixed with a handful of characters asking Shepard how he feels about death. Naturally, this being an RPG, Shepard could have responded multiple ways. I'm guessing you'd take a more detached option, showing that your Shepard tries not to think about it/ isn't effected by it -- and that's fine. But there should also be other options for other players.

You cannot belittle death when it is presented in any form of media. Throughout history, millions of stories have managed to explore the struggle between life and death, even if many people don't realize it. Death is the final frontier -- the last immovable object that every being in known existence faces. Shepard survives that transition-- something that no other human has done. Don't you call Shepard pathetic for recognizing that for him, the first enemy that was destroyed was death.

Well, first, I wouldn't have "killed" Shep, had I written ME2. 

Second, from Shep's point of view, there's the destruction of the Normandy, and then there's Lazarus Station.  It's not the first time Shep has been old cold and woken up on a hospital bed, and not the last. 

100k wrote...

Regarding characterization of Shep, there's only so much that can be done before they take the roleplaying completely out of the game, and just turn it into a "combat game with interactive cinematic experience".  The Sheps in my playthroughs are not the Sheps in anyone else's playthroughs.  My Sheps think what they think, do what they do, and feel what they feel, not what anyone else, at Bioware or elsewhere, says they think, do, and feel.

Yet ME1 had an excellent system in place; have characters occasionally ask questions of Shepard, have other characters make observations about Shepards mental and emotional state (like Shai'ira). These give you more freedom than to do what you want with your Shepard than not giving any options.

And that makes sense, but it doesn't seem to be what we're talking about -- there seems to be a faction that wants Shep to be more characterized FOR us, instead of BY us, because they're judging ME2 as if it were a lit fic novel, not an cRPG.

[Arkitekt]

100k wrote...

But you've missed the point of the death issue in ME2. Death becomes belittled. YES -- Shepard is a soldier and should always fight on. No one is arguing against that. But he died! That 100% has to mean something! That isn't arguable. Almost every single story featuring a hero facing a great evil manages to deal with death.

Bah, your own opinions about death being that meaningful are obviously very important to you, but you should be aware that this is not consensual at all. If I were to be "revived" after a sudden death, I wouldn't expect that kind of religious moment so many people are clamoring must happen in these circumstances.

This could have easily been fixed with a handful of characters asking Shepard how he feels about death.

Please no. Now that would have been terribad. Let's bury the likes of Deanna Troy in their rightful cemiteries and let them rot accordingly. I need not this kind of thing. 

Naturally, this being an RPG, Shepard could have responded multiple ways. I'm guessing you'd take a more detached option, showing that your Shepard tries not to think about it/ isn't effected by it -- and that's fine. But there should also be other options for other players.

Well fine I see where you are coming from, but I really don't see why it should have been "necessary". One thing is to say that it would have been "cool if it did it", quite another is to bash the game for not having it.

You cannot belittle death when it is presented in any form of media.

I really don't see why not. Death is the ultimate "nothing", so what else is there to say about it rather than "nothing"? Of course this is a religious discussion, and for me, I really like the fact that this is how death is portrayed in a story. Finally no more metaphysical discussions about how I feel about "nothing at all", it's refreshing.

Throughout history, millions of stories have managed to explore the struggle between life and death, even if many people don't realize it. Death is the final frontier -- the last immovable object that every being in known existence faces. Shepard survives that transition-- something that no other human has done.

What? Many humans "ressurected" after some time being declared dead. Some even tried to escape the coffins they one day woke up being inside of. Death may be the "final frontier", but there is no "transition" to be declared. One moment you are choking up the other you are waking up inside Cerberus building.

Don't you call Shepard pathetic for recognizing that for him, the first enemy that was destroyed was death.

In that case I would call him a liar, since the feat was 99% Cerberus, not Shep's.

[Arkitekt]

[quote]Fixers0 wrote...

And yet you still a haven't told me the reasoning for having a Human shaped robot out of Organic goo.

Let's put a list togheter of what's wrong with this concept:

1. Visually it looked retarded and raises many questions.[/quote]

Agreed.

[quote]2. There is no reason for it being in the narative.[/quote]

There is. To show what the reapers want from mankind.

[quote]3. The whole liquid human was ridicolous perphaps if it was explored earlier it might have made some sense, but what whe got now was borderline asinine.[/quote]

To your lack of imagination, perhaps. I see no problems on processed goo being funneled to the building of a reaper. You do. Perhaps you know better how to build a reaper. LOL

[quote]4. The whole construction plan and building process is so conveluted and stupid that it won't work. [/quote]

Wait what? 


[quote]All the reasoning the plot gave us was EDI with her "essence of a species" which i don't think neither of us understands or what it even means.[/quote]

And that's perfectly fine since the alternative would be for us to have the detailed construction process spoonfed to us, and that would have been ridiculous from the plot's point of view, which requires for us humans to not understand so easily how and what are the reapers. If EDI was able to guess exactly what was going on, then that meant reaper tech wasn't that impressive. EDI's remarks must be read as metaphorical, not "literal".

[quote]ALSO, the biggest problem with this very reveal is the lack of context or meaning that's it has in the story, again it's just there, Narative: don't ask questions, this is what the Reapers are doing. Second to that is the melting humans down into this giant Robot thing, which doesn't even need an explanation.[/quote]

What I see is your own confusion. You ask questions and the narrative "answers them". The melting humans are being processed and giving rise to a reaper which is, according to Soverreign, a "civilization" in one.
[/quote]

[Killjoy Cutter]

Arkitekt wrote...

Yeah we are more or less in the same wavelenght, albeit underlining different things. Do you know where these maths are? I'm slightly curious.

We'd need to know how thick the planet's atmosphere is, its gravity, etc, to determine terminal velocity.   We'd have to know what Shep lands on.  Etc.  It's also complicated by the fact that we don't know how fast Shep is going upon entering the atmosphere.  Not all re-entries involve massive friction heating -- Porject Manhigh and Project Excelsior involved freefall jumps from the edge of space from 1955 to 1960.  There would be massive friction heating only if Shep is moving far faster than terminal velocity open entering the atmosphere. 



All of that could have been avoided, however, had there been a different opening sequence. 

Normandy still out looking for Geth.
Normandy still attacked by Collector vessel.
Normandy crippled and burning, crew evacuating, Shep stuck on Normandy after launching Joker's pod.   
Fleet that would have been waiting to engage any located Geth jumps into the system. 
Collector vessel is forced to leave before finishing the job, in order to avoid confrontation. 
Shep's comatose and battered body is recovered from the Normandy, still alive.
Shep taken to Alliance hospital. 
Shep stolen by agents, no necessarily of the Shadow Broker, but whatever floats your boat.
Shep stolen from agents by Cerberus (I'd prefer to leave Liara out of it, but whatever).
Shep wakes up from coma a year later, with Cerberus "upgrades".

Or something like that.  Or leave Cerberus out as well.  Whatever. 

That took longer to type than it did to think of.

[100k]

Arkitekt wrote...
Bah, your own opinions about death being that meaningful are obviously very important to you, but you should be aware that this is not consensual at all. If I were to be "revived" after a sudden death, I wouldn't expect that kind of religious moment so many people are clamoring must happen in these circumstances--

My "opinions" of death are rooted in hundreds of millions of works of art, mathematics, thousands of years of evolution, religious and non religious evaluation, mythology, and stories told from every concievable angle. 

Please no. Now that would have been terribad. Let's bury the likes of Deanna Troy in their rightful cemiteries and let them rot accordingly. I need not this kind of thing. 

...*snip'd*

*goes on to say*

Well fine I see where you are coming from, but I really don't see why it should have been "necessary". One thing is to say that it would have been "cool if it did it", quite another is to bash the game for not having it.

Please read my entire post before you reply to it.

I really don't see why not. Death is the ultimate "nothing", so what else is there to say about it rather than "nothing"? Of course this is a religious discussion, and for me, I really like the fact that this is how death is portrayed in a story. Finally no more metaphysical discussions about how I feel about "nothing at all", it's refreshing.

Incorrect. Death is death. Nobody knows what it entails, holds, or consists of. It isn't just the termination of biological functions. But you've missed the point. Shepard doesn't need to pray to god to rationalize death. Shepard doesn't need to see prothean angels. Shepard doesn't need to spend the entire game wondering what caused his demise. Shepard just needs to have an opinion on such an key element of the story.

You know why? Because Shepard is fighting the Reapers so that those on his side have a chance to not die. If death isn't such a big deal, then he shouldn't really care about the Reapers, but he does. And it's not just his own death that's at stake -- but a possible LI, and a squad of teammates, some of whom are friends. 

To belittle the importance of death in the plot is to undermine how dangerous the Reapers actually are. 

What? Many humans "ressurected" after some time being declared dead. Some even tried to escape the coffins they one day woke up being inside of. Death may be the "final frontier", but there is no "transition" to be declared. One moment you are choking up the other you are waking up inside Cerberus building.

First off, many of those people who died (especially those in the ER) usually were only dead for a few minutes to hours. If you're truly dead, your cells rot, your blood dries up, etc. Shepard was dead for at least several days -- and in no condition to be revolved via adrenaline to the heart-- especially after a fall from orbit.

And you can bet anything that every one of those people had some thoughts about dying after death. I highly doubt that any of them just crawled their way out of a coffin, or out of the mourge, shrugged, and went back to work without a backwards glance. 

In that case I would call him a liar, since the feat was 99% Cerberus, not Shep's.

Are you just trolling now? Shepard was revived. There were no other test subjects. 

It's like saying that a medical factory worker in Bangladesh should be more emotionally impacted by the revival a thirty year old woman in Australia, because he helped put together the shock pads that revived her.

I mean...c'mon. 

Modifié par 100k, 09 septembre 2011 - 04:23 .

[Killjoy Cutter]

[quote]Arkitekt wrote...

[quote]Fixers0 wrote...

And yet you still a haven't told me the reasoning for having a Human shaped robot out of Organic goo.

Let's put a list togheter of what's wrong with this concept:

1. Visually it looked retarded and raises many questions.[/quote]

Agreed.


[quote]2. There is no reason for it being in the narative.[/quote]

There is. To show what the reapers want from mankind.


[quote]3. The whole liquid human was ridicolous perphaps if it was explored earlier it might have made some sense, but what whe got now was borderline asinine.[/quote]

To your lack of imagination, perhaps. I see no problems on processed goo being funneled to the building of a reaper. You do. Perhaps you know better how to build a reaper. LOL


[quote]4. The whole construction plan and building process is so conveluted and stupid that it won't work. [/quote]

Wait what? 



[quote]All the reasoning the plot gave us was EDI with her "essence of a species" which i don't think neither of us understands or what it even means.[/quote]

And that's perfectly fine since the alternative would be for us to have the detailed construction process spoonfed to us, and that would have been ridiculous from the plot's point of view, which requires for us humans to not understand so easily how and what are the reapers. If EDI was able to guess exactly what was going on, then that meant reaper tech wasn't that impressive. EDI's remarks must be read as metaphorical, not "literal".


[quote]ALSO, the biggest problem with this very reveal is the lack of context or meaning that's it has in the story, again it's just there, Narative: don't ask questions, this is what the Reapers are doing. Second to that is the melting humans down into this giant Robot thing, which doesn't even need an explanation.[/quote]What I see is your own confusion. You ask questions and the narrative "answers them". The melting humans are being processed and giving rise to a reaper which is, according to Soverreign, a "civilization" in one.
[/quote]
[/quote]

The "melting" of humans into some kind of goo, that is somehow used to make the reaper, is the letdown there.  It's just a body-horror moment that's completely unnecessary to the story or the game. 

As I suggested earlier in the thread, the victims could be scanned for their neurological and genetic makeup in a way that is painful and lethal, and visceral.  Perhaps probes being pushed into them, intense radiological scanning, bleeding from the eyes and ears and nose, convulsing, death... and then turned into husks.  The Reapers are after the genetical and mental makeup of a species, that's how they could it get it.  Turning them into goo and then somehow using that goo to physically make the new reaper requires a leap that flies in the face of some pretty basic science without any real necessity. 

[The Interloper]

Fixers0 wrote...
And yet you still a haven't told me the reasoning for having a Human shaped robot out of Organic goo.

Let's put a list togheter of what's wrong with this concept:

1. Visually it looked retarded and raises many questions.
2. There is no reason for it being in the narative.
3. The whole liquid human was ridicolous perphaps if it was explored earlier it might have made some sense, but what whe got now was borderline asinine.
4. The whole construction plan and building process is so conveluted and stupid that it won't work.

All the reasoning the plot gave us was EDI with her "essence of a species" which i don't think neither of us understands or what it even means.

And this sums it up pretty nicely- From about 06:30

www.youtube.com/watch

ALSO, the biggest problem with this very reveal is the lack of context or meaning that's it has in the story, again it's just there, Narative: don't ask questions, this is what the Reapers are doing. Second to that is the melting humans down into this giant Robot thing, which doesn't even need an explanation.

1. It was based on humans and looked like a human and you just don't like the model design. So? And I'm pretty sure it was supposed to raise questions. If these are bad questions, by all means, list them.
2. To explain why the collectors were abducting humans, which was what got the plot rolling. And to reveal about how reapers are made and set up more revelations about them in ME3. Kind of important.
3. It's pumped into it. It's used as fuel/ nutrients. They call them feeding tubes. Sort of like an umbilical cord. Is this really that hard? By "explain" do you mean "state the crushingly obvious"?
4. Arguments are great when you don't even say what you're arguing against or why.

I dunno, I thought "essence" was a poetic way of saying "the organic matter of every individual in the species." Or are you saying that wasn't explained to your satisfaction? And you can' mumble about how turning humans into paste is ridiculous for some reason. Besides the whole birth fluid thing (I don't know the medical term), you might as well complain that robot gods don't exist in real life and therefore cant' exist in Sci-fi. Or that Sci fi cant happen because it hasnt' happened yet. Suspension of disbelief, remember. Oh, right. You never remember.

And Smudboys arguments regarding the HR were some of his worst. The argument that revealing that Reapers are based on organic matter doesn't make sense is like saying Vader can't be lukes father because he was trying to kill him earlier. The two are hardly mutually exclusive and saying you can't pull it out of your ass without enough exposition is like saying you can't have a plot twist. Twists need just enough exposition to not seem to come out of nowhere and this one has enough.

The Human Reaper has context in the plot and in the lore. It was forshadowed throughout the entire game by the human abductions-you know they're doing something nasty with them. This is another example of saying it doesnt' make sense because the plot didn't shriek from the start that they were building a reaper and what that reaper was supposed to do.

Now I'm not saying that they couldn't have explained it further, but it works just fine as it is. Another example of Smudboy insisting that because they could have done more, it sucks. One does not always follow the other and it doesn't in this case.

[Xeranx]

111987 wrote...

Fixers0 wrote...

Arkitekt wrote...
You were steamrolling here and I was nodding in slight approval until you ended up doing a mistake. The problem with the human reaper isn't its "exposition" or the lack of  "explanation" for it. It was well presented and explained, I can't for the life of me understand this criticism at all. What it really made me go WTF is the arnold image of it, which just made my brain go in unrelated and irrelevant directions and really distracted me from the story. Had it a completely different and original "shape" it would have been better. Perhaps that's what you meant.

What! How exactly?

Why is this thing here?  What's it trying to? How is this all going to work? Liquid Humans? these are all obvious questions raised within the narative that were never anwserd worse, not even adressed, lack the narative didn't want to know anything about this.

The entire concept of  having a giant space terminator triclops use by the Giant evil eldar machine god is utterly baffling to, especially when it doesn't get any kind of exposition or  a purpose within the story,  there wasn't even some for shadowing on it, it just there. it absolutly has no meaning withing the story except for reducing the reapers even further down to cartoonbook villians with their convoluted plans.

So how the heck do you come to the conclusion of it being presented right.

Why is it here? Reaper reproduction

EDI's suppositiion/hypothesis. 

EDI: "They may be facilitating the Reaper equivalent of reproduction. Or it may serve another purpose. I do not have the data to speculate further."

How is this going to work? Millions of humans will be melted down to contribute their genetic material (probably DNA) to the Reaper core.

There's a large metal framework that exists and there's no exterior example of what the human goo is needed for.  Shepard can ask what they want with our DNA.  I don't know how Shepard knows that they're after out for human genetic material, and it is outrightly absurd at this point to think that it's DNA that they want since we know that there's no need for a culling that large especially if all you need is DNA.  

Almost all of us had some exposure to biology before we hit college.  DNA is in the cells, it's in the blood, it's in saliva, etc.  Considering the work we're doing with stem cells, currently, it makes the idea that millions of humans are needed even more absurd.  The Collectors have the perfect way to harvest DNA if that's what is sought after just with the seeker swarms (alone) being able to freeze their targets in their tracks.  If the goal is gathering cells from their targets in order to supply Reapers with some kind of conduction for Reaper synapses or electrical function (provided they aren't just destroying the cells with the melting process) that would be fine.  And it would completely negate the idea that DNA is needed.  That fact that you're guessing DNA ( more than likely because it was mentioned, but doesn't compute compute anyway given my earlier statement) means that you don't know what the reasoning is.  So how can it go from 'probably' to 'resonably explained'?

More to the point EDI says: "The exact construction methods are unclear, but it seems probable that the Reapers absorb the essence of a species; utilizing it in their reproduction process."  

EDI hypothesises reproduction, moves on to determining it is reproduction, and then moves on to saying that it's probable that the essence of a species is used to create a Reaper.  

May I ask you what is the essence of a species?

Why does it look like a human? Because all Reaper cores are based on what species 'made' them. They are then put in similar looking squid shells.

More supposition on EDI's part.  EDI: "It appears that a Reaper's shape is based on the species used to create it."

Bold presents a hypothesis which is in conflict with your statement implying a definitive.

Until we know what the Reaper's ultimate purpose is, you shouldn't judge. Using organics to reproduce could be paramount to their motivations.

That goes for both sides, but one is stating that there's clear evidence and the other is asking what evidence (if any) exists to explain it.

Modifié par Xeranx, 09 septembre 2011 - 04:32 .

[Arkitekt]

100k wrote...

My "opinions" of death are rooted in hundreds of millions of works of art, mathematics, thousands of years of evolution, religious and non religious evaluation, mythology, and stories told from every concievable angle.

This is not true, specially the last bit "every concievable angle". I've read and seen so many stories that simply disregard death to be a vulgar event to render this statement just untrue. And the ones less sensible to it are sci fi ones. Go figure.

Incorrect. Death is death. Nobody knows what it entails, holds, or consists of. It isn't just the termination of biological functions. But you've missed the point. Shepard doesn't need to pray to god to rationalize death. Shepard doesn't need to see prothean angels. Shepard doesn't need to spend the entire game wondering what caused his demise. Shepard just needs to have an opinion on such an key element of the story.

You know why? Because Shepard is fighting the Reapers so that those on his side have a chance to not die. If death isn't such a big deal, then he should really care about the Reapers, but he does. And it's not just his own death that's at stake -- but a possible LI, and a squad of teammates, some of whom are friends.

Unrelated things. From Shepard's point of view he was asleep and then he "got better". That's all he experienced. "Death" is not experienced. You still don't understand this basic point and so try to make a mountain out of nothing at all. The meaning of "death" is that you stop experiencing stuff. And you don't want that happening to your friends and all your comrades in the galaxy, specially in such a traumatic manner.

To belittle the importance of death in the plot is to undermine how dangerous the Reapers actually are.

No. It's unrelated. People die all the time, the problem about the Reapers isn't about "Death" per se.

First off, many of those people who died (especially those in the ER) usually were only dead for a few minutes to hours. If you're truly dead, your cells rot, your blood dries up, etc. Shepard was dead for at least several days -- and in no condition to be revolved via adrenaline to the heart-- especially after a fall from orbit.

This is irrelevant from his own POV. He choked in one moment, he awoke in the next.

And you can bet anything that every one of those people had some thoughts about dying after death. I highly doubt that any of them just crawled their way out of a coffin, or out of the mourge, shrugged, and went back to work without a backwards glance.

You are entitled to doubt anything. These things happen however and require more than a "little doubt" from anyone's part that they don't.

Are you just trolling now? Shepard was revived. There were no other test subjects.

The feat wasn't his. It was Cerberus feat. He didn't "conquer" death, he was revived.

It's like saying that a medical factory worker in Bangladesh should be more emotionally impacted by the revival a thirty year old woman in Australia, because he helped put together the shock pads that revived her.

I mean...c'mon. 

Way to miss the point.

[Killjoy Cutter]

100k wrote...
Incorrect. Death is death. Nobody knows what it entails, holds, or consists of. It isn't just the termination of biological functions. But you've missed the point. Shepard doesn't need to pray to god to rationalize death. Shepard doesn't need to see prothean angels. Shepard doesn't need to spend the entire game wondering what caused his demise. Shepard just needs to have an opinion on such an key element of the story.

You know why? Because Shepard is fighting the Reapers so that those on his side have a chance to not die. If death isn't such a big deal, then he shouldn't really care about the Reapers, but he does. And it's not just his own death that's at stake -- but a possible LI, and a squad of teammates, some of whom are friends. 

To belittle the importance of death in the plot is to undermine how dangerous the Reapers actually are. 

I just don't see it, sorry. 

It looks like you're projecting your own opinion of what death means onto what the story of ME2 needs or doesn't need. 

Shep passes out while drifting away from the shattered Normandy, and wakes up on Lazarus station.  With both the immediate mech attack / escape, and then the Collectors the impending Reaper crisis to deal with.  Given the way most media deals with something like a near-death experience when they get into it, I'm relieved that Shep just gets on with things. 

[TobyHasEyes]

This topic suffers heavily from how much we don't yet understand the Collectors technology. You have no cause to say that the idea that the Human Reaper would use human genetic material is ridiculous when you have no idea what the tech involves

It is like saying Blade Runner is a bad film because you state that no machine could believe it was human

[Labrev]

Just watched ME2 plot analysis, first video of his I've actually watched and I have to say, there's much truth to what he says.

ME1 and 2 may be my favorite games, but they are far from perfect and have a ton of stupid in them, especially ME2. And he gave credit where it was due, ME1 did a great job in story telling and he acknowledged that.