23455 réponses à ce sujet

[LiarasShield]

Still thanatos the triliogy has only been focused around shepard and his or her crew people aren't going to be happy play as joe smoe or suessy lew random person when the triliogy as a whole has focused around the main protagonist being shepard playing as some random person who we don't know is not gonna be received well and this isn't dungeons and dragons or the forgotten realms this is a science fiction space opera that focuses on a main protagonist being shepard and the main antagonists being the reapers with both of them gone they can't make a mass effect 4 at least not one that won't be recieved without heavy criticism

[Thanatos144]

LiarasShield wrote...

Still thanatos the triliogy has only been focused around shepard and his or her crew people aren't going to be happy play as joe smoe or suessy lew random person when the triliogy as a whole has focused around the main protagonist being shepard playing as some random person who we don't know is not gonna be received well and this isn't dungeons and dragons or the forgotten realms this is a science fiction space opera that focuses on a main protagonist being shepard and the main antagonists being the reapers with both of them gone they can't make a mass effect 4 at least not one that won't be recieved without heavy criticism

I think your getting wraped up in the fact that this was Shepards story .....The universe is still there after shepard dies.

[LiarasShield]

if the main protagonist and main antagonist are removed from the trilogy then what is the point of continueing it I don't really see a point to that

[LiarasShield]

still the series has revolved around shepard and the crew and the reapers since they are all gone their wouldn't be a point to try to make a mass effect 4 and any side story they would want to push out could easily go as a comic or a book

[Thanatos144]

LiarasShield wrote...

if the main protagonist and main antagonist are removed from the trilogy then what is the point of continueing it I don't really see a point to that

Do you not read books? You make a new hero and new bad guy......The universe is the setting not the story. ME was shepards Story it is time for a new one.

[LiarasShield]

like the mass effect deciption about kai leng and his process of indouctrination and his experiences with cerberus before or around during the escalation with the reapers

[LiarasShield]

It still wouldn't work within mass effect just like it wouldn't work within halo just like it wouldn't work within baldurs gate and so on and so on without the main protagnist and antagonist their is no real reason to keep the story going

[Thanatos144]

LiarasShield wrote...

like the mass effect deciption about kai leng and his process of indouctrination and his experiences with cerberus before or around during the escalation with the reapers

I see your missing the point. The universe isn't the story. Shepard was
just a story. Now they can make a brand new story in the setting of this
universe....It doesn't have to have anything to do with the reapers or Cerberus or Shepard.....It can be anything they want.

[3DandBeyond]

Holger1405 wrote...

I disagree, if you chose the Destruction ending, you are making a point against Star Child's logic.

The Logic of the Star child, no matter if it is a single very powerful Being or just the voice of the race who build the Reapers, is that on a certain point, the Organic Species need to be destroyed, because elsewise they will build synthetic's who will ultimately erase ALL organic life from the Galaxy. (The Reapers only erase advances organic species, so organic life can carry on.)
This logic leads to the Reapers and the amount of atrocity they committed in countless cycles.

It is imho a flawed logic, because, I agree with you, it is not a given outcome, surely not now, after the Organic Races know about this danger.
So when his logic is flawed, then what he says is not the ultimate truth and as I stated before, you have at least one choice to resist his opinion. (I personally think the control ending is the second one, but that's a matter of opinion.)

This is one where we might agree if destroy did not also mean that no matter how you played the game (the old saved Geth and Quarian thing), the outcome of destroy was the same thing.  The Shepard I played would at least stop and question this as (my only) right decision.  It means I am destroying the very things that put the lie to what the Star Kid is saying.  I destroy EDI and Geth, but their existence and my influence on them exemplified the fallacy in the kid's logic.  In destroying the abhorrent reapers, I destroy what I have in essence created or at the very least nurtured.  I made that nurturing meaningless.  This is the way I see Shepard. 

The Shepard I played always wanted to destroy the reapers.  There were even instances in the codex where others tried controlling or even joining with other things (I do not have the direct quote-at least one was in ME1) and it isn't put in the best light.  Shepard continually rejects the notion of control in all things.  And Synthesis has its own issues-it goes further than control and while not strictly genocidal, it does result in the death of what is.

This is my take on it, an opinion.

Modifié par 3DandBeyond, 04 mai 2012 - 05:26 .

[LiarasShield]

now in certain situations the protagonist make encounter new antagonists or new powerful enemies once per game and that is all great and cool but the reapers have been the main antagonsit through all 3 games their is no true reason to make a mass effect 4 when the main villian that threatens the galaxy is defeated and or gone and most often then not when a series revovles around a protagonsit they don't change the protagonist oftens because it would cause more harm to a series play as a random person then the hero who has been accomplishing things

[Thanatos144]

LiarasShield wrote...

It still wouldn't work within mass effect just like it wouldn't work within halo just like it wouldn't work within baldurs gate and so on and so on without the main protagnist and antagonist their is no real reason to keep the story going

Thats your personal problem. I am excited to see what they make next in this universe. It is all new again.

[LiarasShield]

so no mass effect 4 would cause more harm then good and I would definitly go out of my way to try to convince them not to because any side story they would want to tell can easily be a comic and book no need to play as a random person and have a random antagonist when it will make the main protagonist from before have no importance

[LiarasShield]

it will be better that they finally end the series on a decent note with the extended dlc then to continue the series with random people when the main protagonist and antagonist is dead

Modifié par LiarasShield, 04 mai 2012 - 05:30 .

[LiarasShield]

just end the series on a decent note and create a new series or focus on dragon age 3

[Holger1405]

LiarasShield wrote...
well dear thanaie I even said during
several conversations with you that I would love the dlc to prove me
wrong that I would like the races to survive somehow and that our
sacrifices mean something and that we can have some what of a victory
and see the alliances we forged and see how they play out and for some
of the closure for our crew but for right now thanaie I'm pretty much
right lol

LiarasShield wrote...

I really do think the only opinon that thanatos acknowledges is his own and nobody elses lol

Well, you do pretty much the same...

LiarasShield wrote...

it
will be better that they finally end the series on a decent note with
the extended dlc then to continue the series with random people when the
main protagonist and antagonist is dead

She/He isn't dead in my game, but I also would love to start with a new main Charakter in a difftend setting.

Modifié par Holger1405, 04 mai 2012 - 05:40 .

[LiarasShield]

and holger your no different either so I guess we are all the same in that regard

[Holger1405]

LiarasShield wrote...

and holger your no different either so I guess we are all the same in that regard

Sorry, but I do think that I'm different, meaning: open to arguments.

Modifié par Holger1405, 04 mai 2012 - 05:43 .

[LiarasShield]

Still the series would go on with 10 or 20 different spins off when the main character and main villian are dead their is no need for that to happen at worst they would turn the mass effect series into a mmo

[LiarasShield]

and the good destroy ending is the only chance where might live but we don't even know if he or she does live he or she just takes a breath and then fades to credits that doesn't prove anything he or she still probably died

[Holger1405]

double... <_<

Modifié par Holger1405, 04 mai 2012 - 05:39 .

[LiarasShield]

just took one last gasp before dieing in the earth rubble that let clip and then cut to credits doesn't prove anything about shepard living just maybe I take one last breath before I die

[LiarasShield]

So once again the series continueing when the main protagonist and main antagonist are dead would make no sense I mean espically if the protagnist dies cause if the main hero dies then their is no reason to continue the story and he or she may alaways battle new or more powerful antagonists but it has no purpose of continueing if the main hero of the series is dead

[LiarasShield]

so just let the extended dlc explain wether shepard lived in the good destroy ending if not then thats ok give closure to our forces and some other stuff and just end the series on a good note no reason to make endless pointless sequels

Modifié par LiarasShield, 04 mai 2012 - 05:41 .

[LiarasShield]

Cause some series and some things are great classical because they are one time thing and more often then not sequels cause more damage then helping though god of war is the only series that has still gotten better with certain sequels other then this series and baldurs gate

[Benchpress610]

3DandBeyond wrote...

One brilliant poster put all this into context. In order to believe and accept or to disbelieve and deny the endings as they are requires an incredible amount of undue explanation. Most of it must be totally made up. In short, there's no there there.

We are given very little fuel for the fire. We have to rely on pure conjecture for everything, except when we don't.
.........snip.......

Great post. This sums it up. Even the more articulate end-lovers have to resort to conjecture and speculation to explain away the plotholes.