397 réponses à ce sujet

[Sajuro]

pomrink wrote...

The original isn't absurd. We don have enough details to make that judgement, i disagree with your points on all counts


Edit: to the poster right before me, that is a throwaway statement meant to justify a genocide. which is later proven wrong.

Still from the context and what we know of the Geth as of Mass Effect 1, it is doing what you asked and showing a basis for the conflict between synthetics and organics before 'the retconning' which I really don't know what you mean by that. Also it was a major theme of ME3 it seemed, from the Quarian Geth conflict to what Javik said in relation to it, telling you not to trust Legion because it is not organic and basically saying what the Catalyst said.

[ReachEtaruN74]

The conversation between Tali, Shepard, and Kal'Reegar establishes the danger/importance of dark energy.
3:20
Shepard: "What does that dark energy buildup mean? Is it something we should worry about?"
3:26
Tali: "Hopefully it's an isolated, some rare phenomenon. If dark energy can destabilize solar material..."
Tali: "Probably not something to worry about now, but resources are scarce enough in the galaxy without stars suddenly going dead."

This is foreshadowing as it seems to have no direct connection to anything else. Otherwise it would be pointless banter. Pointless banter doesn't have galaxy wide implications.

Also it would make sense for the geth following the Reapers to be researching the data on that star if the Reapers were looking for a way to stop the buildup of dark energy. Unfortunately, you don't really get to ever ask the geth following the Reapers about this as the only opportunity for this would have been in Mass Effect 3.

[rinoe]

It is bcs any other ending is better.

I want one ( among others) where I can save everyone and everything I attached to. It is a game FGS. I want to be happy, not just dramaticly supriced. I want to feel that power when the job is done.
Save me THAT kind of 'epic'.

I just feel betrayed... not a good feeling.

Modifié par rinoe, 10 mars 2012 - 09:15 .

[CroGamer002]

That's actually even worse ending then those we already got.

[pomrink]

EternalAmbiguity wrote...

pomrink wrote...

The original isn't absurd. We don have enough details to make that judgement, i disagree with your points on all counts


Edit: to the poster right before me, that is a throwaway statement meant to justify a genocide. which is later proven wrong.

I say it is absurd based on the fact that we know nothing about it. That fact--that we don't know really anything about the effect of dark energy from the game--is purely objective. The game mentions it less than a dozen times.

The absurdity is the subjective part. So you're saying it's not absurd to have an ending that hasn't been noted as important (because over the course of, say, 70-80 hours, there's less than ten minutes spent on it) within the first two games?

Well, use a different word. And compared to the current state, yes, because there is no focus or foreshadowing to this one in the previous two games. At least dark energy had tali veetor jacob and kal reegar mentioning it, others did too but they dont come to mind

[Kabraxal]

pomrink wrote...

EternalAmbiguity wrote...

pomrink wrote...

The original isn't absurd. We don have enough details to make that judgement, i disagree with your points on all counts


Edit: to the poster right before me, that is a throwaway statement meant to justify a genocide. which is later proven wrong.

I say it is absurd based on the fact that we know nothing about it. That fact--that we don't know really anything about the effect of dark energy from the game--is purely objective. The game mentions it less than a dozen times.

The absurdity is the subjective part. So you're saying it's not absurd to have an ending that hasn't been noted as important (because over the course of, say, 70-80 hours, there's less than ten minutes spent on it) within the first two games?

Well, use a different word. And compared to the current state, yes, because there is no focus or foreshadowing to this one in the previous two games. At least dark energy had tali veetor jacob and kal reegar mentioning it, others did too but they dont come to mind

So... alll the talk about synthetic life vs the creators is not touching on this at all?  really??

[Malachite73]

Kabraxal wrote...

How anyone thinks this "original" ending was better... *facepalm*

Countless cycles of death and millions of years to combat...... dark energy. Wooooooooo. That makes so much more sense then an actual philosophical principle of cyclical being in nature and the methods some use to control it. O, let's not forget the debate about the "worth" or soul of artificial intelligence vs the soul of organics. Yeah... all that is far less worthy than some menace that somehow requires trillions upon trilllions of deaths and untold suffering to..... what exactly? O right... there is no victory listed there, just chance.

I much prefer the current endings then the dark energy one. That would have been far worse.

Yeah, but someone explained in another forum the idea goes like this: 

The Reapers are immortal, and since they want to live forever, even if it takes billions (which it must, that one Reaper was 37 billion years old) of years, they see a threat to the end of thier existance.  Orgranic life accelerates the process of dark energy spreading, so every 50,000 years they cleanse it.  The whole thing is a surival instinct on thier part.

It makes the Reapers utterly evil, and makes the final decision hard because if the Reapers can't figure it out after 37 Billion years, how can the species of the Milky Way do it in however much they have left?  (I assume little if Haestrom is on its way out).  The ending feels more planed out than the current one.

If you like the current ending however, kudos to you... there are few like you.

[pomrink]

Derp derp standard robot war backstory and shoehorned goodness from day 1 dlc characters is not touching on things. The robot war backstory is an obligatory thing in a large enough sci fi universe, and INCREDIBLY overdone and cliched. the dialogue of the dlc character seems to be retroactive continuity, or retconing

[TheJediSaint]

If the original concept behind the Reapers was for them to try and stop the spread of Dark Energy, then they weren't doing a very good job of it since Dark Energy is already everywhere. And by everywhere, I mean it's estimated to make up over 70% of the universe's mass.

IMO, I think the Reapers canon role as a brutal safeguard against synthetics destroying organics makes more sense. And I think ME3 does a pretty good job with that theme right up until Shepard take the elevator into the Crucible.

I think that the problem is that the ending almost is completely disconnected from the rest of the game. Nothing that you did in the previous 20-30 hours has really has any bearing on the last 5 minutes. As a result, the ending lacks the emotional payoff worthy of the dark and punchy main story.

The way I see it, Bioware should have stuck with the classic Paragon vs Renegade endings that worked well in the previous two games.

As an example, the "Paragon" choice could have Shepard using the Crucible to either destroy the Reapers outright, or weaken them enough for them to be destroyed by the allied fleet. Such as sending out a signal that shut down their Mass-Effect core, or disables their shields.

In contrast, the "Renegade" choice would be to have Shepard use the crucible to establish control over the Reapers. From there he effectively becomes a Reaper star-god that then leads the Reaper fleet out of the Galaxy never to be seen again.

The Effective Military Strength rating would be used to determine the if the Earth was saved, and if Shepard survives the "Paragon" choice. I would probably still have both choices resulting in the destruction of the mass-relay network, as it opens up the chance for the player to "re-discover" the galaxy in future Mass Effect games.

[Kabraxal]

Malachite73 wrote...

Kabraxal wrote...

How anyone thinks this "original" ending was better... *facepalm*

Countless cycles of death and millions of years to combat...... dark energy. Wooooooooo. That makes so much more sense then an actual philosophical principle of cyclical being in nature and the methods some use to control it. O, let's not forget the debate about the "worth" or soul of artificial intelligence vs the soul of organics. Yeah... all that is far less worthy than some menace that somehow requires trillions upon trilllions of deaths and untold suffering to..... what exactly? O right... there is no victory listed there, just chance.

I much prefer the current endings then the dark energy one. That would have been far worse.

Yeah, but someone explained in another forum the idea goes like this: 

The Reapers are immortal, and since they want to live forever, even if it takes billions (which it must, that one Reaper was 37 billion years old) of years, they see a threat to the end of thier existance.  Orgranic life accelerates the process of dark energy spreading, so every 50,000 years they cleanse it.  The whole thing is a surival instinct on thier part.

It makes the Reapers utterly evil, and makes the final decision hard because if the Reapers can't figure it out after 37 Billion years, how can the species of the Milky Way do it in however much they have left?  (I assume little if Haestrom is on its way out).  The ending feels more planed out than the current one.

If you like the current ending however, kudos to you... there are few like you.

There is far more in all three games to support the current endings then anything about dark energy.  Nothing is said in ME1 about it and there are maybe 5 minutes of throw away lines in ME2.  Quite frankly, people are grasping at straws instead of seing the actual light in the endings provided.

News flash: the galaxy was screwed.  Shepard, wheter by sacrifcing himself or not, basically stops armageddon.  Depending on the ending, you can actually have a damned bright future... not to mention the interpretive space that exists.  In many of these, the ending is only as dark as you choose it to be.  Funny that.

[pomrink]

TheJediSaint wrote...

If the original concept behind the Reapers was for them to try and stop the spread of Dark Energy, then they weren't doing a very good job of it since Dark Energy is already everywhere. And by everywhere, I mean it's estimated to make up over 70% of the universe's mass.

IMO, I think the Reapers canon role as a brutal safeguard against synthetics destroying organics makes more sense. And I think ME3 does a pretty good job with that theme right up until Shepard take the elevator into the Crucible.

I think that the problem is that the ending almost is completely disconnected from the rest of the game. Nothing that you did in the previous 20-30 hours has really has any bearing on the last 5 minutes. As a result, the ending lacks the emotional payoff worthy of the dark and punchy main story.

The way I see it, Bioware should have stuck with the classic Paragon vs Renegade endings that worked well in the previous two games.

As an example, the "Paragon" choice could have Shepard using the Crucible to either destroy the Reapers outright, or weaken them enough for them to be destroyed by the allied fleet. Such as sending out a signal that shut down their Mass-Effect core, or disables their shields.

In contrast, the "Renegade" choice would be to have Shepard use the crucible to establish control over the Reapers. From there he effectively becomes a Reaper star-god that then leads the Reaper fleet out of the Galaxy never to be seen again.

The Effective Military Strength rating would be used to determine the if the Earth was saved, and if Shepard survives the "Paragon" choice. I would probably still have both choices resulting in the destruction of the mass-relay network, as it opens up the chance for the player to "re-discover" the galaxy in future Mass Effect games.

You're thinking of dark matter boss

[Malachite73]

Kabraxal wrote...

pomrink wrote...

EternalAmbiguity wrote...

pomrink wrote...

The original isn't absurd. We don have enough details to make that judgement, i disagree with your points on all counts


Edit: to the poster right before me, that is a throwaway statement meant to justify a genocide. which is later proven wrong.

I say it is absurd based on the fact that we know nothing about it. That fact--that we don't know really anything about the effect of dark energy from the game--is purely objective. The game mentions it less than a dozen times.

The absurdity is the subjective part. So you're saying it's not absurd to have an ending that hasn't been noted as important (because over the course of, say, 70-80 hours, there's less than ten minutes spent on it) within the first two games?

Well, use a different word. And compared to the current state, yes, because there is no focus or foreshadowing to this one in the previous two games. At least dark energy had tali veetor jacob and kal reegar mentioning it, others did too but they dont come to mind

So... alll the talk about synthetic life vs the creators is not touching on this at all?  really??

No, it is... but that was supposed to be apart of the Geth/Quarian conflict.  That conflict, like the Genophage, was supposed to be a big theme, not the final one.

The current reason for the Reaper wiping life makes no sense.... because organic life fights with synthetic life, we have to cleanse orgranic life to save it.  That is really some flaw logic.... logic that is too "knowable" for the reapers.

[ReachEtaruN74]

The current ending is defined by a moral dilemma which the course of gameplay can prove to be incorrect. The catalyst says that conflict between synthetic and organic is inevitable because (and this is the important part) the synthetics must realize their superiority and cast down the inferior organics.
Based off a paragon playthrough (i have not yet finished a renegade playthrough) the geth have always wanted peace with the creators (quarians) but have been unable to even pursue the option because the creators have forced them into conflict at every turn.
After a successful (paragon) resolution, even with the immense superiority that (as defined by the catalyst) must cause conflict, the geth instead find creative ways to assist the quarians. This is an impossible situation by the catalyst's logic. Thus the "deep moral dilemma" of the current ending is moot.

Also, relays cannot go from being the most destructive force in the galaxy (even surpassing Reapers) when they explode in Arrival to harmlessly disassembling themselves at the end of 3. They are destroyed, not disassembled. The destruction of the relays (of which the citadel is among them if you remember) would be absolutely devastating to the entire galaxy.

The lore does not fit for this to be the original ending. It feels forced, rushed and unnatural.

[pomrink]

You don't know this ending would be bad. We have less then a page of detail. Calling it bad at this point while ignorant is ill thought out and frankly just seem like one is trying to be contrary. And in some occasions one thing being wrong does validate another.

[Sajuro]

pomrink wrote...

Derp derp standard robot war backstory and shoehorned goodness from day 1 dlc characters is not touching on things. The robot war backstory is an obligatory thing in a large enough sci fi universe, and INCREDIBLY overdone and cliched. the dialogue of the dlc character seems to be retroactive continuity, or retconing

Robot war story, while it may be standard that doesn't make it any less valid, and with Javik it is no a retcon but the character expressing his opinion on what he thinks will happen
But.. if you want resort to doing the derp derp I leave you with this thought
Friendship is Magic.

[Kabraxal]

ReachEtaruN74 wrote...

The current ending is defined by a moral dilemma which the course of gameplay can prove to be incorrect. The catalyst says that conflict between synthetic and organic is inevitable because (and this is the important part) the synthetics must realize their superiority and cast down the inferior organics.
Based off a paragon playthrough (i have not yet finished a renegade playthrough) the geth have always wanted peace with the creators (quarians) but have been unable to even pursue the option because the creators have forced them into conflict at every turn.
After a successful (paragon) resolution, even with the immense superiority that (as defined by the catalyst) must cause conflict, the geth instead find creative ways to assist the quarians. This is an impossible situation by the catalyst's logic. Thus the "deep moral dilemma" of the current ending is moot.

Also, relays cannot go from being the most destructive force in the galaxy (even surpassing Reapers) when they explode in Arrival to harmlessly disassembling themselves at the end of 3. They are destroyed, not disassembled. The destruction of the relays (of which the citadel is among them if you remember) would be absolutely devastating to the entire galaxy.

The lore does not fit for this to be the original ending. It feels forced, rushed and unnatural.

Or maybe... the reason why Shepard can say the catalyst is wrong is because he has personal experience with synthetic life forms that prove it wrong???

[lucidfox]

Simply fading to black with Shepard and Anderson sitting next to each other, with some sort of epilogue would have been better than what we got, though.

Yes, this. The dark energy idea sucks in my eyes as much, if not more than the final ending...

Modifié par lucidfox, 10 mars 2012 - 09:35 .

[ReachEtaruN74]

Kabraxal wrote...

Malachite73 wrote...

Kabraxal wrote...

How anyone thinks this "original" ending was better... *facepalm*

Countless cycles of death and millions of years to combat...... dark energy. Wooooooooo. That makes so much more sense then an actual philosophical principle of cyclical being in nature and the methods some use to control it. O, let's not forget the debate about the "worth" or soul of artificial intelligence vs the soul of organics. Yeah... all that is far less worthy than some menace that somehow requires trillions upon trilllions of deaths and untold suffering to..... what exactly? O right... there is no victory listed there, just chance.

I much prefer the current endings then the dark energy one. That would have been far worse.

Yeah, but someone explained in another forum the idea goes like this: 

The Reapers are immortal, and since they want to live forever, even if it takes billions (which it must, that one Reaper was 37 billion years old) of years, they see a threat to the end of thier existance.  Orgranic life accelerates the process of dark energy spreading, so every 50,000 years they cleanse it.  The whole thing is a surival instinct on thier part.

It makes the Reapers utterly evil, and makes the final decision hard because if the Reapers can't figure it out after 37 Billion years, how can the species of the Milky Way do it in however much they have left?  (I assume little if Haestrom is on its way out).  The ending feels more planed out than the current one.

If you like the current ending however, kudos to you... there are few like you.

There is far more in all three games to support the current endings then anything about dark energy.  Nothing is said in ME1 about it and there are maybe 5 minutes of throw away lines in ME2.  Quite frankly, people are grasping at straws instead of seing the actual light in the endings provided.

News flash: the galaxy was screwed.  Shepard, wheter by sacrifcing himself or not, basically stops armageddon.  Depending on the ending, you can actually have a damned bright future... not to mention the interpretive space that exists.  In many of these, the ending is only as dark as you choose it to be.  Funny that.

No. There is no bright future because Bioware has seemingly forgotten that when relays are destroyed, they take the entire cluster with it. Every single relay exploding would throw off the balance of the galaxy likely causing the galaxy to spin off into space or at the very best supporting life millions or billions of years from the end of ME3.

[Malachite73]

Kabraxal wrote...

Malachite73 wrote...

Kabraxal wrote...

How anyone thinks this "original" ending was better... *facepalm*

Countless cycles of death and millions of years to combat...... dark energy. Wooooooooo. That makes so much more sense then an actual philosophical principle of cyclical being in nature and the methods some use to control it. O, let's not forget the debate about the "worth" or soul of artificial intelligence vs the soul of organics. Yeah... all that is far less worthy than some menace that somehow requires trillions upon trilllions of deaths and untold suffering to..... what exactly? O right... there is no victory listed there, just chance.

I much prefer the current endings then the dark energy one. That would have been far worse.

Yeah, but someone explained in another forum the idea goes like this: 

The Reapers are immortal, and since they want to live forever, even if it takes billions (which it must, that one Reaper was 37 billion years old) of years, they see a threat to the end of thier existance.  Orgranic life accelerates the process of dark energy spreading, so every 50,000 years they cleanse it.  The whole thing is a surival instinct on thier part.

It makes the Reapers utterly evil, and makes the final decision hard because if the Reapers can't figure it out after 37 Billion years, how can the species of the Milky Way do it in however much they have left?  (I assume little if Haestrom is on its way out).  The ending feels more planed out than the current one.

If you like the current ending however, kudos to you... there are few like you.

There is far more in all three games to support the current endings then anything about dark energy.  Nothing is said in ME1 about it and there are maybe 5 minutes of throw away lines in ME2.  Quite frankly, people are grasping at straws instead of seing the actual light in the endings provided.

News flash: the galaxy was screwed.  Shepard, wheter by sacrifcing himself or not, basically stops armageddon.  Depending on the ending, you can actually have a damned bright future... not to mention the interpretive space that exists.  In many of these, the ending is only as dark as you choose it to be.  Funny that.

Because of the Quarians and Geth was a conflict meant to span the three games.  The collectors aren't mentioned in ME1, and came out of nowhere to be the villian for 2.  The dark energy was mentioned in two, but they couldn't have long winded conversations about it because it was supposed to be the main theme for three.  The one conversation they do have about it however implies it is very dangerous it if spreads, foreshadowing at least some mention for the third game, which never comes to fruition.

[ReachEtaruN74]

Kabraxal wrote...

ReachEtaruN74 wrote...

The current ending is defined by a moral dilemma which the course of gameplay can prove to be incorrect. The catalyst says that conflict between synthetic and organic is inevitable because (and this is the important part) the synthetics must realize their superiority and cast down the inferior organics.
Based off a paragon playthrough (i have not yet finished a renegade playthrough) the geth have always wanted peace with the creators (quarians) but have been unable to even pursue the option because the creators have forced them into conflict at every turn.
After a successful (paragon) resolution, even with the immense superiority that (as defined by the catalyst) must cause conflict, the geth instead find creative ways to assist the quarians. This is an impossible situation by the catalyst's logic. Thus the "deep moral dilemma" of the current ending is moot.

Also, relays cannot go from being the most destructive force in the galaxy (even surpassing Reapers) when they explode in Arrival to harmlessly disassembling themselves at the end of 3. They are destroyed, not disassembled. The destruction of the relays (of which the citadel is among them if you remember) would be absolutely devastating to the entire galaxy.

The lore does not fit for this to be the original ending. It feels forced, rushed and unnatural.

Or maybe... the reason why Shepard can say the catalyst is wrong is because he has personal experience with synthetic life forms that prove it wrong???

Yes thank you for reading and repeating what I just said in fewer words from a slightly different perspective.

[Kabraxal]

ReachEtaruN74 wrote...

Kabraxal wrote...

Malachite73 wrote...

Kabraxal wrote...

How anyone thinks this "original" ending was better... *facepalm*

Countless cycles of death and millions of years to combat...... dark energy. Wooooooooo. That makes so much more sense then an actual philosophical principle of cyclical being in nature and the methods some use to control it. O, let's not forget the debate about the "worth" or soul of artificial intelligence vs the soul of organics. Yeah... all that is far less worthy than some menace that somehow requires trillions upon trilllions of deaths and untold suffering to..... what exactly? O right... there is no victory listed there, just chance.

I much prefer the current endings then the dark energy one. That would have been far worse.

Yeah, but someone explained in another forum the idea goes like this: 

The Reapers are immortal, and since they want to live forever, even if it takes billions (which it must, that one Reaper was 37 billion years old) of years, they see a threat to the end of thier existance.  Orgranic life accelerates the process of dark energy spreading, so every 50,000 years they cleanse it.  The whole thing is a surival instinct on thier part.

It makes the Reapers utterly evil, and makes the final decision hard because if the Reapers can't figure it out after 37 Billion years, how can the species of the Milky Way do it in however much they have left?  (I assume little if Haestrom is on its way out).  The ending feels more planed out than the current one.

If you like the current ending however, kudos to you... there are few like you.

There is far more in all three games to support the current endings then anything about dark energy.  Nothing is said in ME1 about it and there are maybe 5 minutes of throw away lines in ME2.  Quite frankly, people are grasping at straws instead of seing the actual light in the endings provided.

News flash: the galaxy was screwed.  Shepard, wheter by sacrifcing himself or not, basically stops armageddon.  Depending on the ending, you can actually have a damned bright future... not to mention the interpretive space that exists.  In many of these, the ending is only as dark as you choose it to be.  Funny that.

No. There is no bright future because Bioware has seemingly forgotten that when relays are destroyed, they take the entire cluster with it. Every single relay exploding would throw off the balance of the galaxy likely causing the galaxy to spin off into space or at the very best supporting life millions or billions of years from the end of ME3.

Asteroid hitting relay... feild of energy travelling through relay.  Yes... I see how they are so much alike that both MUST destroy the Relays in the same way.  Simple theory... the relays are used as the dissemination tool, thus draining them of their power and ultimately destroying the metallic husks that remain.  Simple and doesn't require massive amounts of wild guess work as does this ridiculous dark energy story line that has almost no ties into the story whatsoever.

[pomrink]

EternalAmbiguity wrote...

pomrink wrote...

You don't know this ending would be bad. We have less then a page of detail. Calling it bad at this point while ignorant is ill thought out and frankly just seem like one is trying to be contrary. And in some occasions one thing being wrong does validate another.

I'm not saying it would be a bad ending in and of itself. I'm saying that, based on the fact that there's been so little attention to it, it would be a bad ending. If they'd devoted a lot of time to it, then it could very well be good.

And, one thing being wrong validates another wrong thing? Okay man...

Don't twist words. Did not say another wrong thing. Said another thing. A lot of time was devoted to this. Before it was scrapped.