188 réponses à ce sujet

[BlueAlchemy]

 Title says it all. What are your thoughts? I for one pray to the maker that this will not be the case with defeating the reapers. I still have great faith in Bioware even after DA:2 (which was still "fun" to say the least) but more often than not, in movies, games, books etc... the final blow is some form of miracle that occurs to the main characters. Now this can be acceptable if you know from the beginning that what you are doing to stop the antagonist is completely ridiculous, as seen in The Lord of the Rings Trilogy. But we haven't had any hint as to how we can stop them thus far. So I suppose I am saying that I will be heavily disappointed if my favorite video game villains of all time are destroyed by a mere virus or giant death star canon that you figure out how to make in the second half of the campaign. 

[Rivercurse]

Can't believe no one has though to ask this before.

[Merchant2006]

I never asked for this.

[DiebytheSword]

A Deus Ex Machina plot device is a device that swoops in to save the day, breaking the internal logic and consistancy of the plot. It is unlikely that anything will be doing any swooping. Bioware knows swooping is bad.

Now, it is highly likely that we will see a MacGuffin, or a Checkov's Gun. These literary devices are acceptable in light of an overwhelming enemy like the Reapers. If these devices require hardship on the part of the protagonist to obtain or understand, they are not Deus Ex Machinas (a win button stops being a win button when you need to fight through the enemy to press it).

[BlueAlchemy]

Tis true. I suppose I'm just hoping it will be something more thought provoking than a GIANT CANNON. Also, I'm familiar with Chekhov's Gun... but what's a MacGuffin? Do you mean a MacGruber? (kidding)

[The Sapien]

A MacGruber Gun should had been in the title, lol, hilarious!
Please, BioWare, no MacGruber Gun.

[LegionMan]

I have faith in BW that they've slowly been establishing hints at how to beat the reapers.  I can totally dig a Chekov's Gun sort of situation based on what we've experienced...

Merchant2006 wrote...

I never asked for this.

"I'll never stop looking"
-Methinks we need to create an ASSUMING CONTROL 'shop with Adam Jensen wearing his glasses.  Any takers?
http://4playerpodcas...am-Jensen21.jpg

[didymos1120]

LegionMan wrote...

"I'll never stop looking"

"But I will seemingly stop caring and not bring you up much almost immediately after I've found you, nor will you really factor into my various ending monologues."

Modifié par didymos1120, 15 novembre 2011 - 10:03 .

[The Sapien]

My highest of hopes is that Shepard has some sort of contact or discovery with originators of the Reapers or how they came to be, so we get new awesome story material, and that this somehow brings about a solution, perhaps from a group of beings similar to the Reapers in another galaxy who then give us a fighting chance with a new weapon or something. Would that be acceptable?

Otherwise, yeah, I don't see how just uniting the races against a common threat is going to help much. Yet, I don't want just a MacGruber Gun device thrown in at the last minute.

[Nimrodell]

Well, ME series already had several McGuffins like prothean trinket from the Consort or 'beings of light', even batarian Leviathan can be considered McGuffin so far unless it changes in ME3.

[psiasterisk]

While we´re discussing different types of gun, I´d like to point out, that a MacGyver´s Gun would be an awesome resolution to ME3.

And, btw.:

DiebytheSword wrote...

Now, it is highly likely that we will see a MacGuffin, or a Checkov's Gun.

But if a MacGuffin is used to resolve a threat, it wouldn´t be a MacGuffin in the first place, right?
Also, if the ending involves some kind of Chekov´s Gun, I would consider it bad form if it only appeared as late as ME3. But then, if there was one in ME2, I didn´t notice it (apart from, maybe, the "dark energy"-thing from Tali´s RM).

My bet is on either some BDO (read: "Big Dumb Object", like the DRS in ME2), the Death Star solution or the Independence Day solution.

Modifié par psiasterisk, 15 novembre 2011 - 10:14 .

[JamieCOTC]

BlueAlchemy wrote...

Tis true. I suppose I'm just hoping it will be something more thought provoking than a GIANT CANNON. Also, I'm familiar with Chekhov's Gun... but what's a MacGuffin? Do you mean a MacGruber? (kidding)

It might be a Scottish name, taken from a story about two men in a train. One man says "What's that package up there in the baggage rack?", and the other answers "Oh, that's a McGuffin". The first one asks "What's a McGuffin?". "Well", the other man says, "It's an apparatus for trapping lions in the Scottish Highlands". The first man says "But there are no lions in the Scottish Highlands", and the other one answers "Well, then that's no McGuffin!". So you see, aMcGuffin is nothing at all.
- Alfred hitchcock

A McGuffin is an item (though not always an item specifically) the hero is trying to obtain or keep out of the hands of the enemy.  In ME, the McGuffin is the Cypher.  Both the hero (Shepard) and villain (Saren) are trying to obtain it. In hitchcock's theory, both Shepard and Saren might as well be looking for a mystical head of lettuce.  It doesn't matter what "it" is, just that someone is trying to get it thus conflict ensues. 

Modifié par JamieCOTC, 15 novembre 2011 - 10:29 .

[DiebytheSword]

psiasterisk wrote...

While we´re discussing different types of gun, I´d like to point out, that a MacGyver´s Gun would be an awesome resolution to ME3.

And, btw.:

DiebytheSword wrote...

Now, it is highly likely that we will see a MacGuffin, or a Checkov's Gun.

But if a MacGuffin is used to resolve a threat, it wouldn´t be a MacGuffin in the first place, right?
Also, if the ending involves some kind of Chekov´s Gun, I would consider it bad form if it only appeared as late as ME3. But then, if there was one in ME2, I didn´t notice it (apart from, maybe, the "dark energy"-thing from Tali´s RM).

My bet is on either some BDO (read: "Big Dumb Object", like the DRS in ME2), the Death Star solution or the Independence Day solution.

The key to a DEM being a DEM is abruptness and sudden, break neck change in fortune for the protagonist.

Wikipedia

A deus ex machina ( /ˈdeɪ.əs ɛks ˈmɑːkiːnə/ or /ˈdiːəs ɛks ˈmækɨnə/ day-əs eks mah-kee-nə;[1] Latin: "god out of the machine"; plural: dei ex machina) is a plot device whereby a seemingly inextricable problem is suddenly and abruptly solved with the contrived and unexpected intervention of some new event, character, ability, or object.

A MacGuffin, on the other hand:

Wikipedia

A MacGuffin (sometimes McGuffin or maguffin) is "a plot element that catches the viewers' attention or drives the plot of a work of fiction".[1] The defining aspect of a MacGuffin is that the major players in the story are (at least initially) willing to do and sacrifice almost anything to obtain it, regardless of what the MacGuffin actually is. In fact, the specific nature of the MacGuffin may be ambiguous, undefined, generic, left open to interpretation or otherwise completely unimportant to the plot. Common examples are money, victory, glory, survival, a source of power, a potential threat, or it may simply be something entirely unexplained.
The MacGuffin is common in films, especially thrillers. Usually the MacGuffin is the central focus of the film in the first act, and then declines in importance as the struggles and motivations of characters play out. It may come back into play at the climax of the story, but sometimes the MacGuffin is actually forgotten by the end of the film. Multiple MacGuffins are sometimes—somewhat derisively—referred to as plot coupons.[2][3]
The term is also used by a game development studio as a reference to a design object which forces interactivity on to a narrative.[4]

Note that the MacGuffin can come back in the end and be used to resolve the plot and still be a plot coupon, not a DEM hail mary.

A DEM saves the protagonist, a MacGuffin can be used by the Protagonist to save the day.  Very, very different literary concepts which people on this board continuously confuse for one another.


Our initial adventure will see us find out about one or more MacGuffins, and chase it across the galaxy as a means to defeat the Reapers, which we will totally have to work towards obtaining and more importantly using.  This disqualifies any such plot device as a DEM.

Now if the new squad mate who shall not be named came out of a hybernation pod, resurrected a cloned fleet of his peeps, and unloaded some galaxy saving whup ass on the Reapers, or if the beings of light came out of no where and said "Inodctrinate this!" then we'd have DEM problems.

BDO's are closely related to MacGuffins, except one is just static awesome, the other is highly sought after and might turn into a Red Herring.

Thanks Jaime, ninja'd

Modifié par DiebytheSword, 15 novembre 2011 - 10:31 .

[robarcool]

No deus Ex Machinas and no unimaginative solution like the one in Gears 3 (if that is classified as something other than deus ex machina).

[didymos1120]

Nimrodell wrote...

Well, ME series already had several McGuffins like prothean trinket from the Consort or 'beings of light', even batarian Leviathan can be considered McGuffin so far unless it changes in ME3.

That's not what "MacGuffin" means.  Neither of those drove the plot in the least, because they were completely divorced from it.  In ME1, the MacGuffin was the Conduit (and to lesser extents, the Mu-relay and Cipher).  In ME2, the Reaper IFF.  In a way, the squadmates themselves served as MacGuffins too, since the whole game revolved around acquiring them.

Modifié par didymos1120, 15 novembre 2011 - 10:35 .

[onelifecrisis]

DiebytheSword wrote...

The key to a DEM being a DEM is abruptness and sudden, break neck change in fortune for the protagonist.

We are two thirds of the way through the story already. Anything indtroduced now is abrupt/sudden.

[shepskisaac]

Deus Ex Machina is already the favourite buzz, pot-stirring & whine word now on BSN. Just as it was with retcon, it doesn't matter that using it makes no sense whatsoever in the context. It's about the negative conotation such word bears and the fact you can throw it out in the wild and other panicked fans will pick it up without thinking twice and run amok.

Modifié par IsaacShep, 15 novembre 2011 - 10:43 .

[BatmanPWNS]

IsaacShep wrote...

Deus Ex Machina is already the favourite buzz, pot-stirring & whine word now on BSN. Just as it was with retcon, it doesn't matter that using it makes no sense whatsoever in the context. It's about the negative conotation such word bears and the fact you can throw it out in the wild and other panicked fans will pick it up without thinking twice and run amok.

[DiebytheSword]

onelifecrisis wrote...

DiebytheSword wrote...

The key to a DEM being a DEM is abruptness and sudden, break neck change in fortune for the protagonist.

We are two thirds of the way through the story already. Anything indtroduced now is abrupt/sudden.

Apparently your opinion of abrupt and sudden trancends mine as fact.

We are two thirds of the way through the series, not the story of Mass Effect 3.  Anything introduced to defeat the reapers by your definition would then be a DEM.    By your definition even getting the races to work together to help at Earth at the behest of Shepard would be Deus Ex Machina.  I am starting to think that people arguing the DEM angle were never going to be happy with whatever solution was presented to the reaper threat.

Under what scenario would you not consider a way to defeat the reapers a DEM?  How would you resolve the plot?
 
Kindly tell me how this affects the other points, like breaking the internal story logic, or perhaps how the object in question swoops in and saves the day in an incredible reversal of fortune that stretches suspension of disbelief?

Spoilery info follows (specific details not mentioned, but grayed out of an abundance of caution):

Prothean technology was always on the brink of unlocking the Reapers secrets, they alone copied the mass relay.  At the risk of very minor spoiler bait, if the MacGuffin comes from the Protheans, it was a solution that was there from Mass Effect 1.  Regardless of whether you saw it in leaked files or not, regardless of whether or not they had it written down during ME1 or not, the potential for it was always there, and has been from the moment we saw the beacon's message on Eden Prime.  The cycles must not communicate dangers to subsequent ones, or the Reaper's trap fails.  We know that the Protheans worked against them for centuries, to believe Ilos was the only one was naiive at best.

Modifié par DiebytheSword, 15 novembre 2011 - 10:53 .

[psiasterisk]

DiebytheSword wrote...

[cut for space]

Thanks for the, albeit unneeded, explanation.

First off:

You´re right about DEMs. I didn´t really mention them, but okay. I don´t really think that a DEM, contrary to thr OP´s fears, will not be used for the simple reason that most people know what they are and can therefore spot them.

I would argue, however, that the question whether the device used to resolve the story is an actual MacGuffin hinges on whether it is integral to the rest of the story. As correctly pointed out by jamie, the question is if the object can be interchanged for something completely different without affecting the rest of the story. If, for example, we had an object in our possession already but had to bring about the right situation for its use (with the antagonist being unaware of our plans), we would have story with no MacGuffin in it. Note at this point, that not every motivation is a MacGuffin, else there would be no meaning to the word.

I would also contest your argument that BDOs are closely related to MacGuffins. A BDO can be a MacGuffin, but not every BDO is a MacGuffin (that´s why I mentioned the DRS instead of, for example, the Conduit, the latter being one, the former not).

[BlueAlchemy]

Right-o. I agree With onelifecrisis to a certain extent on the matter, but IsaacShep is right. We shouldn't be loosely throwing the word around, no matter the indignant context. However, I am sure that most of us would prefer a creative resolution that doesn't feel forced at the last minute. Now that I think of it, the best example of this disappointment would be the finale of LOST, if any of you watched that show. Maker, what a terrible ending...

Modifié par BlueAlchemy, 15 novembre 2011 - 10:59 .

[DiebytheSword]

psiasterisk wrote...

DiebytheSword wrote...

[cut for space]

Thanks for the, albeit unneeded, explanation.

First off:

You´re right about DEMs. I didn´t really mention them, but okay. I don´t really think that a DEM, contrary to thr OP´s fears, will not be used for the simple reason that most people know what they are and can therefore spot them.

I would argue, however, that the question whether the device used to resolve the story is an actual MacGuffin hinges on whether it is integral to the rest of the story. As correctly pointed out by jamie, the question is if the object can be interchanged for something completely different without affecting the rest of the story. If, for example, we had an object in our possession already but had to bring about the right situation for its use (with the antagonist being unaware of our plans), we would have story with no MacGuffin in it. Note at this point, that not every motivation is a MacGuffin, else there would be no meaning to the word.

I would also contest your argument that BDOs are closely related to MacGuffins. A BDO can be a MacGuffin, but not every BDO is a MacGuffin (that´s why I mentioned the DRS instead of, for example, the Conduit, the latter being one, the former not).

I'll conceed the point that BDOs are not always MacGuffins, I believe I said they were closely related.  I'm closely related to my brother, but I'm not nearly the same person he is.

The definitions were not just for you, sorry if you took it that way.

A MacGuffin can be used later on in the plot, nothing pre-empts this from happening, nor does it change its status to DEM or anything else.

[DiebytheSword]

Arcian wrote...

A DEM is only a DEM if it comes out of the blue in the last act of the work in question, with no previous mention or knowledge by the relevant characters. As someone who has read the spoiler leaks, I can say right away that this is not the case in ME3.

I'm glad a few people agree with me on this.  Sadly others are changing the definition of sudden.

[Kaiser Shepard]

Arcian wrote...

A DEM is only a DEM if it comes out of the blue in the last act of the work in question, with no previous mention or knowledge by the relevant characters. As someone who has read the spoiler leaks, I can say right away that this is not the case in ME3.

Then again, you can say a lot without telling the truth or being honest to yourself and others.

robarcool wrote...

No deus Ex Machinas and no unimaginative solution like the one in Gears 3 (if that is classified as something other than deus ex machina).

It's about as contrived as that one, although arguably worse because of the series having started rather ambitiously when it came to the story and choice/consequence aspects.

Modifié par Kaiser Shepard, 15 novembre 2011 - 11:06 .