Taleroth wrote...
It doesn't necessarilly no. But it's an option for the narrative.
On that heavily belittles the Reaper's role in this story, and pretty much plays Dragon Age all over again. The plot lists the Reapers as a true Galactic threat over all other threats. The way you would play them out would put up the question of why the Reapers were never beaten in previous cycles. "Oh but they got the drop on them." is not a valid excuse.
Just because Soverign died does not mean suddenly every fleet can be upgraded in 3 years to defeat an entire armada that is millions of years more advanced.
Only the writer's choices. Choosing McGuffin over technological advancement isn't entirely satisfying.
Only MacGuffin if the Humans invented it out of scrap and an Ezo core. This was a weapons the Protheans divised, likely off the research they procured form the cycle before them and so on and so forth.
In the end, this story was the tale of the Reapers, how they managed to trick generations of civilization and trap them into a technological development to defeat them. You think Soverign was the first Reaper to die? Or that their weapons was the first of their technology we adapted. Again, you're overestimating your narative path's plausability.
Good for him. Irrelevant. Thanix cannons have other uses, like general military might. Which is the Turians' entire thing.
And with no sense of urgancy, even the development of Military Might would take time. Just because we CAN build a nuke, dosent mean every ship should be armed with one within half a decade. You need only look to the lagging of parts our own military's development to see why the Thanix is not a liable answer here.
Cerberus was still fringe. The governments should have far better resources.
Cerberus was goverment before it went Rogue, and the Illusive Man did not have to deal with Beurocracy to develop what he needed.
Twice in ME2 that Cerberus was referred to as something similar in scope to the Salarian STG. And over the entire course of that game we were shown examples that even Specter's and Citidel's resources were fairly limited.
Turians would not be reluctant to increase their armament.
Your assumption, not the writers. You're presuming for the race, where I'm going right from the examples of the games. Turian military, yes, quick to change, hell no.
Lots of things are possible. Yes, it's possible for the writers to write themselves into a corner needing a McGuffin. But it's also possible using established elements to not do that.
Again, not a McGuffin, learn your tropes please.
Also, they did use established elements. Elements they had set up from game 1 - The Relays and the fact that the Protheans were on the cusp of unlocking the technology when their war began. They did create a solution out of established elements - just not the elements YOU wanted them to.
And they wrote themselves into a corner with the first game.
This concept of disagreeing with something = licence to belittle is really getting annoying, and the conversation is not worth continuing - as you're calling for a complete rewrite of the game. If you don't like it, don't get it. But don't call a game you haven't played sucky because you don't like the abstract concepts.
If that was the case I could call every Military game absolutely horrible.
Retour en haut
