23455 réponses à ce sujet

[Holger1405]

Benchpress610 wrote...

I know I might upset a few friends here, but I must insert my thoughts on the matter of
Shepard’s body burning or not. This is only on the burning issue and looked at strictly from a scientific point of view.
 
It all depends on how thick is the atmosphere of the planet and the gravitational pull of such planet.  In this case Alchera’s surface gravity is 0.85g (0.85*9.8 m/s2 = 8.33 m/s2)and Atm. pressure is 0.83 atm.

The gravity pull produces enough acceleration (8.33 m/s2) to generate terminal velocity (speed at which drag = gravity) in that atmosphere.
The density of the atmosphere (whatever it is made of) is high enough to produce enough drag (friction) to cause terminal velocity. I’m looking only at the Physics of the issue here. I’m not concern with Chemistry just yet. Under these conditions, the speed of a body falling through that atmosphere will produce such high friction to generate enough heat to incinerate that body to cinder. Now the question is: would Shepard’s armor be able to withstand that kind of heat? Probably for a few seconds it will, but not likely for the whole length of the fall.
 
Now let’s look at the Chemistry. Must posts I’ve read assume that oxygen is needed to burn something, and they are mostly right. Burning, or more correctly, combustion is an oxidation chemical reaction. A fuel and an oxidizer agent are needed to produce combustion. BTW, the type of reaction is named after the most common oxidizer there is: oxygen. The most common combustion reactions are the ones using hydrocarbons as fuel: generic equation—n(CH)+ n(O2) = n(CO + CO2 + H2O) + HEAT. However, there are other fuels and oxidizers. For example, the solid fuel rocket boosters that are the source for secondary propulsion on the Space Shuttle use a mixture of aluminum and magnesium as fuel and a substance containing sulfur as oxidizer. They don’t need oxygen to burn.
 
Back to Shepard’s body falling through an atmosphere of comparable density as ours into a planet with gravity similar to ours. The heat is generated by physical/mechanical means, not chemical. There is no “burning” in the sense of flames, but the enormous heat will vaporize the body (again another physical process). The human body is composed of mostly water (can’t remember the %), carbon, nitrogen and other elements. There we have it all the elements necessary for a good combustion under intense heat.
 
OMFG…I can’t believe I’m agreeing with Bubbles on this one.
 
All of that being said however, doesn’t discredit the fact that, as Archonsg put it in his post a few pages back, a little space magic sprinkled here and there to help the plot along is OK as long as it’s explained and maintains the narrative coherence of the story. Nothing compared to the appalling disjointed ending.
 
Sorry if I miss one or two numbers there. To write this, I had to dust off a few corners of my brain, I thought I never had to use ever again.

Actually  you are not agree with Thanatos144,  you are agreeing with me.
(I brought that matter up in another discussion.)
So rest assured. 

[LiarasShield]

My whole issue is that we have been fighting and uniting the gtalaxy for all three games to destroy and beat the reapers so that the galaxy can live on or continue so that we may have a brighter future

But the thing is that we encounter the catalyst he is the creator of the reapers that have been destroying organic civilizations for thousands or millions of years and has used twisted logic to validate his need to have the reapers continously destroy most organic life every 50 thousand years now how can you see the catalyst as not being evil when he has had the reapers destroy and harvest people from other races so that they can destroy their own races so how the collectors who were once protheans ended up destroying or harvesting the remaining protheans beside javik

Think of it this way why would the main bad guy or villian give you ways to destroy his forces or for you to beat him unless he was trying to trick you or cause more damage to you or your forces

What makes me even more mad is not only can shepard not counter the creator of the reapers false logic but gives in and submits to the creator of the reapers choices that he wants shepard to make Instead of shepard beating the reapers and wether dieing as a hero or making a great sacrifice under his or her own steam and in 2 out of the 3 ending the reapers live and fly offf and in all the endings your forces are trapt around our damaged solar system with the relays destroyed and having them all trapt there and leave it at that as a cliff hanger yeah that isn't cool

But yes essentially in all the endings the reapers win because 2 out of the 3 they still live and fly away and even in destroy all our relays are destroyed and all our forces are trapt around our dying solar system In the end the reapers still have the last laugh

And Come to think of it was that the catalysst real appearance or was he only playing to shepards senses or could it be hologram and that the catalyst is very far away like how harbigner was controlling the collectors from far away in dark space then that means wether we beat the reapers or not the catalyst will continue to make new reapers and send them through dark space every 50 thousand years

This could spand endless sequels with randomly new heroes and news races every 50 thousand years or so but playing a series where you never beat the main villian or it never ends yeah that would be my breaking point I don't want to see this great series end up like final fantasy with endless sequels that hold really no true point or where different final fantasy hold no true collective to the previous ones that came before

But yeah how can anyone not see the catalyst who created the reapers that have been destroying us and trying to destroy everyone in the galaxy as not being evil or someone or something that would try to deceive you or make you go down the paths that he want so that the reapers still win or survive it almost feels like a small portion of the fanbase forgot the whole purpose of why we united the galaxy to fight the reapers in the first place

[3DandBeyond]

And just to point out in order to make an informed decision as to whether or not the beginning of ME2 could happen, we have to have additional information. You'd need another oxidizer, not specifically said to be present, perhaps need to know the rate of fall (speed), the angle of descent, the thickness (not density of) the atmosphere. Earth has a layered atmosphere and of differing densities. Gravity and so on. And orbital height does matter. Back to the Space Shuttle-it always was in a lower orbit. Many satellites are in an even lower Earth orbit and are actually in decaying orbit. They will fall, not quickly. The Shuttle it was debated was never even actually in space since it was still within the Earth's upper atmosphere.

And then you have to be able to add that all up. We don't know enough. Actually we don't even know how fast the Normandy was travelling and Shepard's body could be much like the debate of a fly on an airplane. When it left the Normandy it could have had some orbital velocity to it as could the Normandy. And again, satellites have fallen to Earth as well as sadly Shuttle pieces, and the Shuttle Columbia was on powered descent.

I obviously don't now much about all this, but it can make some sense to me and that's enough.

Modifié par 3DandBeyond, 18 mai 2012 - 07:58 .

[daveyeisley]

Not upset at ya bro.

Well, I followed your line of thinking there benchpress, and I think its pretty good, but I also think all of our analysis is over simplified, such as it is. Anyhow...

Here is a good link with info on terminal velocity. Note the following:

The magnitude of terminal velocity depends on the weight of the falling body.
For a heavy object, the terminal velocity is generally greater than a light object.
This is because air resistance is proportional to the falling body's velocity
squared. For an object to experience terminal velocity, air resistance must balance
weight. An example that shows this phenomenon was the classic illustration of
a rock and a feather being dropped simultaneously. In a vacuum with zero air resistance,
these two objects will experience the same acceleration. But on the earth this
is not true. Air resistance will equal weight more quickly for the feather than
it would for the rock. Thus the rock would accelerate longer and experience a
terminal velocity greater than the feather.

Another factor that affects terminal velocity is the orientation at which a
body falls. If an object falls with a larger surface area perpendicular to the
direction of motion it will experience a greater force and a smaller terminal
velocity. On the other hand, if the object fell with a smaller surface area perpendicular
to the direction of motion, it will experience a smaller force and a greater terminal
velocity.

The terminal velocity for a skydiver was found to be in a range from 53 m/s
to 76 m/s. Four out of five sources stated a value between 53 m/s and
56 m/s. Principles of Physics stated a value of 76 m/s. This
value differed significantly from the others. Then again, the value is variable
since the weight and the orientation of the falling body play significant roles
in determining terminal velocity.

Now, in a thinner atmosphere, there is less resistance, meaning a higher value for terminal velocity (but this also means less particles to collide with to generate thermal buildup). And Shepard's corpse is certainly not acting like a skydiver, either, so he will not be presenting optimal surface area perpendicular to his descent to reduce the value of terminal velocity. Even so, if we *double* the numbers above, its not going to generate enough heat to incinerate the body, especially in  sub-freezing temperatures.

There might be *some* heat generated, but not enough to vaporize it.

Edit: Also of note is that 'weight' referenced in the first line of the quote is dependant upon both mass and gravity. We can readily assume shepards mass is comparable to the skydivers mentioned (even in his armor), but the gravity is less, meaning his weight is less, and thus his terminal velocity is also less than on earth.

Additionally, shepards body will be 'tumbling' as it descends, which means any surface that begins to generate thermal energy will rotate away from the point of friction and  "shockwave" and begin to cool, further reducing heat overall.

Modifié par daveyeisley, 18 mai 2012 - 08:18 .

[LiarasShield]

LiarasShield wrote...

My whole issue is that we have been fighting and uniting the gtalaxy for all three games to destroy and beat the reapers so that the galaxy can live on or continue so that we may have a brighter future

But the thing is that we encounter the catalyst he is the creator of the reapers that have been destroying organic civilizations for thousands or millions of years and has used twisted logic to validate his need to have the reapers continously destroy most organic life every 50 thousand years now how can you see the catalyst as not being evil when he has had the reapers destroy and harvest people from other races so that they can destroy their own races so how the collectors who were once protheans ended up destroying or harvesting the remaining protheans beside javik

Think of it this way why would the main bad guy or villian give you ways to destroy his forces or for you to beat him unless he was trying to trick you or cause more damage to you or your forces

What makes me even more mad is not only can shepard not counter the creator of the reapers false logic but gives in and submits to the creator of the reapers choices that he wants shepard to make Instead of shepard beating the reapers and wether dieing as a hero or making a great sacrifice under his or her own steam and in 2 out of the 3 ending the reapers live and fly offf and in all the endings your forces are trapt around our damaged solar system with the relays destroyed and having them all trapt there and leave it at that as a cliff hanger yeah that isn't cool

But yes essentially in all the endings the reapers win because 2 out of the 3 they still live and fly away and even in destroy all our relays are destroyed and all our forces are trapt around our dying solar system In the end the reapers still have the last laugh

And Come to think of it was that the catalysst real appearance or was he only playing to shepards senses or could it be hologram and that the catalyst is very far away like how harbigner was controlling the collectors from far away in dark space then that means wether we beat the reapers or not the catalyst will continue to make new reapers and send them through dark space every 50 thousand years

This could spand endless sequels with randomly new heroes and news races every 50 thousand years or so but playing a series where you never beat the main villian or it never ends yeah that would be my breaking point I don't want to see this great series end up like final fantasy with endless sequels that hold really no true point or where different final fantasy hold no true collective to the previous ones that came before

But yeah how can anyone not see the catalyst who created the reapers that have been destroying us and trying to destroy everyone in the galaxy as not being evil or someone or something that would try to deceive you or make you go down the paths that he want so that the reapers still win or survive it almost feels like a small portion of the fanbase forgot the whole purpose of why we united the galaxy to fight the reapers in the first place

I can't state this much more if you can't see where the major flaws are or that you love the endings then why are you here bubbles you got what you wanted and supposedly claim to be satisfied no need to come back here no more lol

Modifié par LiarasShield, 18 mai 2012 - 08:11 .

[Holger1405]

3DandBeyond wrote...


Not sure what you mean...I think maybe you think I am always attacking
Bioware and ME games, but far from it.  I don't.  I think they blew it
big time with the ending.  I don't like it and it has so many
unforgivable egregious errors to it that others have said far better
than I.

I am just disputing what another poster tried to
assert-the idea that since the game has some space magic in it in
places, that no one should have a problem with space magic at the end.

Archonsg
has so fully disputed the idea that Shepard's body hitting the planet
meant that it had been burnt up or disintegrated that I believe it's a
non-issue.  That being said, many people didn't like the whole Lazarus
Project thing and that's ok.  I personally don't see it as game-breaking
because it opened up some plotlines in the game.  It also helped bring
Cerberus more fully into the conflict so it was ok by me even if it was
wholesale space magic-I don't think it is, but so what.

However, I
do not accept the last thing I will remember and the thing I am working
toward in 3 games being made whole cloth of space magic.  The star kid
comes out of nowhere, but I was fighting Reapers.  In the last 5
minutes, he's the real enemy.  Let me shoot myself right here.  He
controls the Reapers and won't stop them, thinking that destroying
things to save them from being destroyed makes sense-ok, he's crazy. 
Please, let me shoot him, or ok, I want to shoot myself, come on.

But nooooooooooo, instead I got to shoot Anderson and never even cried or
anything, and TIM being indoctrinated meant he could suddenly control
me.  Hmmm, yes that now makes sense.  Please give Anderson a gun and let
him shoot me in the head now!

Ok, now in the span of 5 minutes the Citadel/Crucible mating project has created a baby-3 count them 3
awful, stupid, nonsensical choices.  Hmmm. frickin' frackin' stupid gun
won't kill the kid, can't kill myself, and all I can do is wait and
fail.  I got all these damn stupid assets just for this, 3 color
decision where in the end my Love Interest and friends end up flying to
Nirvana to live and procreate as I vaporize.  Great friends.  I want to
shoot them now.  And the best, the very best I can hope for is for my
body to end up in a pile of rubble and my gun is nowhere to be found. 
Thank God it's the end.

Last thought-a few people have debated
the ability of Shepard's body to remain partly intact when falling to a
planet unlike Earth in atmosphere and with a lot of unknowns.  How then
can it be that it then makes sense that Shepard landed on Earth, which
we do know something about without even armor on (since that got blown
off before Shepard got to the Citadel) and is able to take a breath,
that incredibly happy super duper satisfying gasp of life and the
promise of skipping through daisies?  Now that's space magic.

I never thought you would attack Bioware always, (I just refer to this Thread) I see that you are a Fan, a Fan who is disappointed with the endings.

It is completely OK to be disappointed. I, as I stated over and over again, have my own issues with the endings, these are not as big as yours, but still there.

My Problem is, and the matter of Shepard's Body is a pretty good example, that you and a few other People here, not only criticizing the real problems with the endings, the plot holes, the missing closure, etcetera, you are going further by adding Problems to the endings, as example the question if the relay systems are destroyed or that the Catalyst could be a Harbinger trap.
Something that is pretty much easier to explain or to disprove than the matter of Shepard been resurrected.
(Don't get me wrong, the resurrection matter was never an issue for me, Bioware did this to get an incredible plot twist, and it was imho awesome storytelling and so I didn't have a problem at all with this little example of Space Magic.)   

Be honest enough to admit that, if Sheppard's Body falling to the ground of this Planet, would be part of the ME3 ending, you would rip it apart in no time. (Well, actually you did this already be adding the question why Sheppard's landing on Earth gasping is possible. btw the only logical answer to this is that he was brought back the same way he was brought up.)

This all are issues for me because it make it easy for Bioware to point and say, "see this People simple not getting the endings."

Modifié par Holger1405, 18 mai 2012 - 08:52 .

[LiarasShield]

the endings are flawed and I definitly can't accept them as is with the knowledge and foresight that I have

[LiarasShield]

LiarasShield wrote...

LiarasShield wrote...

My whole issue is that we have been fighting and uniting the gtalaxy for all three games to destroy and beat the reapers so that the galaxy can live on or continue so that we may have a brighter future

But the thing is that we encounter the catalyst he is the creator of the reapers that have been destroying organic civilizations for thousands or millions of years and has used twisted logic to validate his need to have the reapers continously destroy most organic life every 50 thousand years now how can you see the catalyst as not being evil when he has had the reapers destroy and harvest people from other races so that they can destroy their own races so how the collectors who were once protheans ended up destroying or harvesting the remaining protheans beside javik

Think of it this way why would the main bad guy or villian give you ways to destroy his forces or for you to beat him unless he was trying to trick you or cause more damage to you or your forces

What makes me even more mad is not only can shepard not counter the creator of the reapers false logic but gives in and submits to the creator of the reapers choices that he wants shepard to make Instead of shepard beating the reapers and wether dieing as a hero or making a great sacrifice under his or her own steam and in 2 out of the 3 ending the reapers live and fly offf and in all the endings your forces are trapt around our damaged solar system with the relays destroyed and having them all trapt there and leave it at that as a cliff hanger yeah that isn't cool

But yes essentially in all the endings the reapers win because 2 out of the 3 they still live and fly away and even in destroy all our relays are destroyed and all our forces are trapt around our dying solar system In the end the reapers still have the last laugh

And Come to think of it was that the catalysst real appearance or was he only playing to shepards senses or could it be hologram and that the catalyst is very far away like how harbigner was controlling the collectors from far away in dark space then that means wether we beat the reapers or not the catalyst will continue to make new reapers and send them through dark space every 50 thousand years

This could spand endless sequels with randomly new heroes and news races every 50 thousand years or so but playing a series where you never beat the main villian or it never ends yeah that would be my breaking point I don't want to see this great series end up like final fantasy with endless sequels that hold really no true point or where different final fantasy hold no true collective to the previous ones that came before

But yeah how can anyone not see the catalyst who created the reapers that have been destroying us and trying to destroy everyone in the galaxy as not being evil or someone or something that would try to deceive you or make you go down the paths that he want so that the reapers still win or survive it almost feels like a small portion of the fanbase forgot the whole purpose of why we united the galaxy to fight the reapers in the first place

I can't state this much more if you can't see where the major flaws are or that you love the endings then why are you here bubbles you got what you wanted and supposedly claim to be satisfied no need to come back here no more lol

These endings are really almost as teriible as final fantasy XIII-2 ending here

[3DandBeyond]

I think the whole idea of Shepard's body in the beginning of ME2 is a red herring-it was just used by one person to explain something that makes no sense. It could be totally impossible and I don't care, it's ok. But in order to dispute it one cannot accept the ending and bubbles doesn't dispute either. So, back to the point it wasn't something that mattered. It's an interesting discussion, but it actually was one of my favorite parts of the game because it introduced the idea of real heartache to the game. But, I'd further assert that it's almost like you couldn't like that part and like the ending. I kind of saw the defiance in Shepard there just after being blown out of the Normandy, where s/he seems to take a posture right before the tear in the suit. That just says a lot to me. Shepard was facing certain death-no two ways about it and was ready to fight.

And the heartache, though not really well played out in the game-I mean people just say things like, "I heard you were alive", but there is some of it in Lair of the Shadow Broker (odd that's so much like Liara the Shadow Broker). I think no matter if Liara is Shepard's love interest or just a friend, it seems to matter to her. So, I thought it was an effective beginning.

But another thought was just why did they do that? If you delve a little more deeply it is almost gratuitous. But it sets up Shepard as being larger than life, unconquerable. After that I kind of felt Shepard was more than just a fighter, not a god, but one truly tough person able to do what they wanted him/her to do.

[sdinc009]

3DandBeyond wrote...

Benchpress,
We'd never get mad at you or anyone else with any kind of respectful disagreement. I think all along we've all said that there's just enough more that we don't know that allows us to suspend our disbelief. I had thought perhaps Shepard's body would possibly melt, but vaporize I am sure you are correct, makes more sense. I don't think it was ever a given that in any conventional sense Shepard's body wouldn't be destroyed, but that with what we know it might not be.  And actually the fact that in order to disbelieve it with any real proof or certainty one needs to have such in depth knowledge is quite the opposite of what is needed to disbelieve the ending. 

It's the fact that there's just enough dramatic importance and it's just done well enough to make me accept the magic that may exist. It's an "I don't care, it works for me" kind of thing. I just don't see the ending in the same light.

Artistic or poetic license allows one to use fantastic fictional elements in order to drive a story, but only if they bend your sense of the possible or if the dramatic effect is great.

If at the end, the star kid had shown up earlier and said it was the horrible evil being behind the reapers and it gave TIM magical powers of control, that might have worked. If the star kid had said in Harbinger's voice that Shepard only had 3 choices to save some other lives in the galaxy and s/he had to make it now, I might have been able to live with it-well, it would have had to be done really well. I think it's all about the context that the space magic is used in and just how well it is used that matters. The ending wasn't done well. You have this kid-like thing with a kid-like voice and aren't given anything to go on. If he'd been explained better, it is possible it would have worked. Maybe not, but...the Shepard falls to Alchera was done fairly well in my opinion.

And actually you aren't agreeing that much with bubbles.  He thinks that if you can accept that about the beginning of ME2 then the ending is fine, because Space Magic is Space Magic.  He even said he didn't have a problem with it himself so the whole discussion was pointless.

It is important to note proper placement. The fall is acceptable because of where it is placed in the ME 2 story which is in the very beginning. It's in the Exposition stage and is just used to setup the events of the story. The player can accept these events even if they don't quite fall in line with reality and let the story begin.  However, in the Resolution stage thing get much more critical because this is where everything the whole story has been building towards is going to be resolved

[3DandBeyond]

Holger1405 wrote...

I never thought you would attack Bioware always, (I just refer to this Thread) I see that you are a Fan, a Fan who is disappointed with the endings.

It is completely OK to be disappointed. I, as I stated over and over again, have my own issues with the endings, these are not as big as yours, but still there.

My Problem is, and the matter of Shepard's Body is a pretty good example, that you and a few other People here, not only criticizing the real problems with the endings, the plot holes, the missing closure, etcetera, you are going further by adding Problems to the endings, as example the question if the relay systems are destroyed or that the Catalyst could be a Harbinger trap.
Something that is pretty much easier to explain or to disprove than the matter of Shepard been resurrected.
(Don't get me wrong, the resurrection matter was never an issue for me, Bioware did this to get an incredible plot twist, and it was imho awesome storytelling and so I didn't have a problem at all with this little example of Space Magic.)   

Be honest enough to admit that, if Sheppard's Body falling to the ground of this Planet, would be part of the ME3 ending, you would rip it apart in no time. (Well, actually you did this already be adding the question why Sheppard's landing on Earth gasping is possible. btw the only logical answer to this is that he was brought back the same way he was brought up.)

This all are issues for me because it make it easy for Bioware to point and say, "see this People simple not getting the endings."

I think truthfully at times it's a language problem here-you seem to do quite well with the difference but I'm not always understanding you.

Yes, Shepard's body falling at the end would be and is a problem because the ending just suspends reality.  But in the beginning of ME2, it doesn't.  Star Trek may have more to do with accepting it that ME does because Spock's body fell to the Genesis planet (event though it was in a pod).  I don't see it as a problem because coupled with what's going on with the Normandy, it just works dramatically.  That's what poetic or dramatic or artistic license is.  You can suspend reality in order to fit something in that might on its own not be believed.

Many of us have pointed out the destruction of the relays as destroying the star systems they are in because that is what we were shown in the game in The Arrival.  That's the only context of a relay exploding that we have.  Any other assertion that it's a different type of explosion does not to my knowledge exist in the game. 

So, I had based that upon the game I played not just something I made up.  I used what I had been told in the game to say this makes sense as to what would happen but even if it didn't happen-why wouldn't Shepard think it could?  When Shepard is told the relays will explode all Shepard knew was that one had blown up before (yes by having an asteroid shot at it) and it killed 300k Batarians.  This is all that Shepard knows.  Shepard isn't told that it won't be the same type of explosion, but Shepard doesn't even ask.  Players are asking where it says it's different.

Why is it impossible to believe the Catalyst is a trap for Harbinger?  I'm not saying it is, but go on only what Shepard knows not what the player knows happens.  Shepard only knows that the star kid lives in the Citadel.  The star kid is what in your mind?  Good? Evil?  And I define good as against the reapers and evil as for the reapers.  Well, I will answer that for you-the kid is worse than the reapers.  They are apparently obeying him because he controls them.  Does that make him nice?  So if you can believe the relays have some magical limited explosion and I don't care if they do or don't-that's not the worst thing about the ending-and you just believe this, then why is it impossible for someone else (not me as such) to believe this evil kid is a trap for Harbinger?  It makes more sense than that he is there to help Shepard after trying to kill and having killed trillions of people.

Yes, I have a problem with Shepard's ash covered body lying on the ground in the end.  It's not the only thing wrong with the ending, and it is certainly not the same thing as the beginning of ME2.  And there is nothing to suggest it fell back through the conduit that Shepard used to go up to the Citadel.  I think you've made mention that the part with the 3 choices was something on the Crucible so how did Shepard suddenly fly to the conduit and fall back to Earth?  This is space magic.  At least at the beginning of ME2 we see Shepard falling toward the planet.  We see nothing in the ending.

You know very well that it isn't just one scene that people dislike-it's the totality of numerous things we are shown, what Shepard knows or what makes sense as far as what Shepard would do.  It's what the kid says, it's the choices, and so on.

And it is also another thing that is said within the game-the mass relays.  They should have already been shut down, so destroying them or even getting to the Citadel didn't make sense.  In ME1 or 2, it's said that the Reapers shut down the relays to strand people so they are easier to harvest.  It's one of the first things they do.  I repeat, they do it to strand people.  I don't care how you parse it, the eventual certain destruction of the relays isn't a good thing even if they don't explode.  But that isn't the worst thing.  I never said it was.

How are these issues that Bioware can point to and say it's because we don't understand the endings?

You even say there are a lot of things you didn't like about the ending.  I understand what they say, but it's nonsense.  I understand the concept of the created destroying the creator-sci fi writers have written about some doom and gloom about this for years, but it's dis-counted within the games.  But the reason to destroy organics in order for synthetics not to destroy organics is the stupidest thing I have ever heard.  Please, if I must understand that then they can just keep their games.  In fact, I will send them the ones I own.

What basically you are telling me is that I am stupid for not understanding something stupid.  Ok, then color me dumb and I am happy to be so.

[Holger1405]

3DandBeyond wrote...


I think truthfully at times it's a language problem here-you seem to do quite well with the difference but I'm not always understanding you.

Yes, Shepard's body falling at the end would be and is a problem because the ending just suspends reality.  But in the beginning of ME2, it doesn't.  Star Trek may have more to do with accepting it that ME does because Spock's body fell to the Genesis planet (event though it was in a pod).  I don't see it as a problem because coupled with what's going on with the Normandy, it just works dramatically.  That's what poetic or dramatic or artistic license is.  You can suspend reality in order to fit something in that might on its own not be believed.

Many of us have pointed out the destruction of the relays as destroying the star systems they are in because that is what we were shown in the game in The Arrival.  That's the only context of a relay exploding that we have.  Any other assertion that it's a different type of explosion does not to my knowledge exist in the game. 

So, I had based that upon the game I played not just something I made up.  I used what I had been told in the game to say this makes sense as to what would happen but even if it didn't happen-why wouldn't Shepard think it could?  When Shepard is told the relays will explode all Shepard knew was that one had blown up before (yes by having an asteroid shot at it) and it killed 300k Batarians.  This is all that Shepard knows.  Shepard isn't told that it won't be the same type of explosion, but Shepard doesn't even ask.  Players are asking where it says it's different.

Why is it impossible to believe the Catalyst is a trap for Harbinger?  I'm not saying it is, but go on only what Shepard knows not what the player knows happens.  Shepard only knows that the star kid lives in the Citadel.  The star kid is what in your mind?  Good? Evil?  And I define good as against the reapers and evil as for the reapers.  Well, I will answer that for you-the kid is worse than the reapers.  They are apparently obeying him because he controls them.  Does that make him nice?  So if you can believe the relays have some magical limited explosion and I don't care if they do or don't-that's not the worst thing about the ending-and you just believe this, then why is it impossible for someone else (not me as such) to believe this evil kid is a trap for Harbinger?  It makes more sense than that he is there to help Shepard after trying to kill and having killed trillions of people.

Yes, I have a problem with Shepard's ash covered body lying on the ground in the end.  It's not the only thing wrong with the ending, and it is certainly not the same thing as the beginning of ME2.  And there is nothing to suggest it fell back through the conduit that Shepard used to go up to the Citadel.  I think you've made mention that the part with the 3 choices was something on the Crucible so how did Shepard suddenly fly to the conduit and fall back to Earth?  This is space magic.  At least at the beginning of ME2 we see Shepard falling toward the planet.  We see nothing in the ending.

You know very well that it isn't just one scene that people dislike-it's the totality of numerous things we are shown, what Shepard knows or what makes sense as far as what Shepard would do.  It's what the kid says, it's the choices, and so on.

And it is also another thing that is said within the game-the mass relays.  They should have already been shut down, so destroying them or even getting to the Citadel didn't make sense.  In ME1 or 2, it's said that the Reapers shut down the relays to strand people so they are easier to harvest.  It's one of the first things they do.  I repeat, they do it to strand people.  I don't care how you parse it, the eventual certain destruction of the relays isn't a good thing even if they don't explode.  But that isn't the worst thing.  I never said it was.

How are these issues that Bioware can point to and say it's because we don't understand the endings?

You even say there are a lot of things you didn't like about the ending.  I understand what they say, but it's nonsense.  I understand the concept of the created destroying the creator-sci fi writers have written about some doom and gloom about this for years, but it's dis-counted within the games.  But the reason to destroy organics in order for synthetics not to destroy organics is the stupidest thing I have ever heard.  Please, if I must understand that then they can just keep their games.  In fact, I will send them the ones I own.

What basically you are telling me is that I am stupid for not understanding something stupid.  Ok, then color me dumb and I am happy to be so.

Well, to make this short. No I don't think that you are stupid. 

              



 

[Voodoo-j]

So we know Shepards body survived, so lets go by removing the impossible, and go with the improbable. Say even if science proves his body would be ashes, it's still possible however unlikely that his body could have been shielded by a piece of the Normandy during re entry. So no matter how you cut it, there is a way to explain it. (maybe not very likely, but yet possible)


(long day for me as well)

Modifié par Voodoo-j, 18 mai 2012 - 11:19 .

[Benchpress610]

Back from work…ugh.. Friday afternoon rush hour traffic was murderous today.
 
@3DandBeyond, daveyeisley,
Thanks for the kind words, and you’re both right. There are many unknown variables in this issue to reach an educated conclusion. We can only speculate. As long as it is compliant and coherent with the narrative, who cares. It has nothing to do with the ending of ME3. As sdinc009 very well put it, it’s placed at the beginning of the story to set up the events that would follow.
 
3D you are right this was a red herring. Bubbles knowingly or not diverted the attention from the main issue here which is the ending.

[BlueStorm83]

I was just thinking at work today, as to "Why would they put the "it also will kill the Geth!" addendum into the destroy option. The answer is that nobody AT ALL would have picked Control or Synthesize aft120 hours of trying to kill the reapers unless they tossed in some bull**** to make destroying them "bad."

Kinda weak writing.

Also, after all that, couldn't we have, like, fought and actually BEAT the reapers, and then, standing atop Harbinger's exposed brain, THEN been given the choices? Use his own parts to send a self destruct order to the other reapers, or installed control mechanisms into Harbinger for the same seasons, or taken Harbinger's systems to analyze the technology and synthesize humanity?

They could have done that would necessarily killing off The Illusive Man. Could have had this geat scene with Shepard atop Harbinger's smoking carapace, Harbinger begging for his life and offering the Synthesis ending, telling Shepard that if he wanted, Harbinger could reconstruct all the people that were harvested from their genetic material and the neural information that they took before the processing, the Illusive Man standing there in person, begging Shepard to allow him to use his Cerberus tech to take control of Harbinger and rebuild all that humanity lost in the invasion, Anderson on the radio screaming for Shepard to just shoot the damn thing in its brain and end it.

Now THAT would have been a tough call for me. Become half-reaper, but bring everyone back to life? Give the most dangerous man alive the most dangerous machine ever created, but trust in his genuine desire to see humanity strong and safe? Or kill Harbinger, preventing any future horror or betrayal, at the cost of sustaining all the damage that had already happened.

Sure, the "bring everyone back" ending there really WOULD be serious space magic, but way way less magic than the current "Hey, I'm Space-Evil Incarnate! TRUST ME TO HELP YOOOOOOOOOU!" and then rainbows blow up all the space roads.

[3DandBeyond]

Holger1405 wrote...


Well, to make this short. No I don't think that you are stupid. 

              

Haha, it would be ok if you did, but my comment came off harsher than I meant it to.  I was exaggerating.

Part of the problem is I think I often use the word nonsense and that seems to mean that I don't understand something, that it makes no sense, but colloquially, I mean that it's silly, childish.  So to me the ending is silly to the extreme, but I do understand it.  I would not presume to understand how Bioware thought it meshed with the ME stories, but that's something else.  That makes no sense to me for all the reasons I and others have given.

[BlueStorm83]

3DandBeyond wrote...

  I would not presume to understand how Bioware thought it meshed with the ME stories, but that's something else.  That makes no sense to me for all the reasons I and others have given.

I WOULD very much like to get a reply from one of the writers, or even a chat or an interview with one, and just ask 'Why did you think that this was good?  Didn't you see that fans would have problems with the setup, the dialogue, the choices, the way that no matter what they pick, almost the same exact thing happens?  Please, how did this get made without any of you guys saying, "Wait a second, this doesn't really fit with what we've done so far?'"

[JoJohnson117]

Mass Effect has to be my favourite game series of all time and Bioware has done an amazing job of constructing such a great story. Everything about Mass Effect in 1, 2 and 3 was all about choice. The choice of on Virmire, the choice to save the council, whether you would romance anyone and many other choices. This is why it seems that the endings betrayed Mass Effect, you lost all choice. You couldn't convince the Illusive Man that he was making the wrong decision but maybe you could have at least saved Anderson by Killing the Illusive Man. Then came the wierd part where you were suddenly beamed up and introduced to the kid you witnessed being killed by the Reapers at the start of the game. Now I felt this was where it start to go downhill. You had just spent 90 hours saving the galaxy, traversing across beautiful landscapes, fighting the Reapers and in the end it came down to 3 almost identical choices. I would have rathered take a gamble and said to the crucible that I would rather let my men die in a fight then let them turn into one of you. There should have been many ways the ending split to give the player more feeling of choice at the endgame. All the war assets and squad members seemed so pointless at the end as well. You should have seen all your war assets battling it out with the Reapers, not a default CGI scene that is exactly the same but in a different colour. Joker and your squad ran from the fight! They would never do that and why did the Mass Relays have to detonate for the plan to work. This would leave all your war assets stranded instead of able to return to their homeworld. And your squad should search for you instead of leaving, even if you died, then they should mourn your loss, have their own time on screen. You should see them walking through the wreckage of their own homeworld. Struggling to come to terms with what has happened. Your entire crew from the normandy, friends from Cerberus, Kelly, your new members of the crew didn't matter whether you had saved them in the ending you constructed. Now I understand that there is no happy ending in war but there could have been a happier ending to this game. Please make more options for the player as this just felt like the ending to deus ex with 3 options and minor tweaks. I know you guys can fix this and I am happy to wait but please don't just leave it how it is. I made multiple playthroughs and will replay the entire trilogy but if the endings will be the same it doesn't feel right. Also make femsheps ending different in some way to male shepard. Seems wired that I would say this but she should have more emotion for the child. And feel for the loss. But keep her badass side intact as well. Also I don't get why the creators were humans. There have been many cycles so why were humans chosen. Plus harbinger didn't seem like the bad guy he should have been.

[JoJohnson117]

BlueStorm83 wrote...

I was just thinking at work today, as to "Why would they put the "it also will kill the Geth!" addendum into the destroy option. The answer is that nobody AT ALL would have picked Control or Synthesize aft120 hours of trying to kill the reapers unless they tossed in some bull**** to make destroying them "bad."

Kinda weak writing.

Also, after all that, couldn't we have, like, fought and actually BEAT the reapers, and then, standing atop Harbinger's exposed brain, THEN been given the choices? Use his own parts to send a self destruct order to the other reapers, or installed control mechanisms into Harbinger for the same seasons, or taken Harbinger's systems to analyze the technology and synthesize humanity?

They could have done that would necessarily killing off The Illusive Man. Could have had this geat scene with Shepard atop Harbinger's smoking carapace, Harbinger begging for his life and offering the Synthesis ending, telling Shepard that if he wanted, Harbinger could reconstruct all the people that were harvested from their genetic material and the neural information that they took before the processing, the Illusive Man standing there in person, begging Shepard to allow him to use his Cerberus tech to take control of Harbinger and rebuild all that humanity lost in the invasion, Anderson on the radio screaming for Shepard to just shoot the damn thing in its brain and end it.

Now THAT would have been a tough call for me. Become half-reaper, but bring everyone back to life? Give the most dangerous man alive the most dangerous machine ever created, but trust in his genuine desire to see humanity strong and safe? Or kill Harbinger, preventing any future horror or betrayal, at the cost of sustaining all the damage that had already happened.

Sure, the "bring everyone back" ending there really WOULD be serious space magic, but way way less magic than the current "Hey, I'm Space-Evil Incarnate! TRUST ME TO HELP YOOOOOOOOOU!" and then rainbows blow up all the space roads.

Just read this and couldn't agree more. Maybe there could be other options like sacrificing races for your own survival or even an option to let the reapers continues the cycle and leave it to the next cycle to decide whether or not they will pursue destruction of the reapers. Another option would be to use harbinger as an explosive device and destroy earth and all of the local cluster in an attempt to preserve all other life(in this option some human fleets and other race's fleets would be able to escape before you hit the self-destruct. 

[LiarasShield]

LiarasShield wrote...

LiarasShield wrote...

LiarasShield wrote...

My whole issue is that we have been fighting and uniting the gtalaxy for all three games to destroy and beat the reapers so that the galaxy can live on or continue so that we may have a brighter future

But the thing is that we encounter the catalyst he is the creator of the reapers that have been destroying organic civilizations for thousands or millions of years and has used twisted logic to validate his need to have the reapers continously destroy most organic life every 50 thousand years now how can you see the catalyst as not being evil when he has had the reapers destroy and harvest people from other races so that they can destroy their own races so how the collectors who were once protheans ended up destroying or harvesting the remaining protheans beside javik

Think of it this way why would the main bad guy or villian give you ways to destroy his forces or for you to beat him unless he was trying to trick you or cause more damage to you or your forces

What makes me even more mad is not only can shepard not counter the creator of the reapers false logic but gives in and submits to the creator of the reapers choices that he wants shepard to make Instead of shepard beating the reapers and wether dieing as a hero or making a great sacrifice under his or her own steam and in 2 out of the 3 ending the reapers live and fly offf and in all the endings your forces are trapt around our damaged solar system with the relays destroyed and having them all trapt there and leave it at that as a cliff hanger yeah that isn't cool

But yes essentially in all the endings the reapers win because 2 out of the 3 they still live and fly away and even in destroy all our relays are destroyed and all our forces are trapt around our dying solar system In the end the reapers still have the last laugh

And Come to think of it was that the catalysst real appearance or was he only playing to shepards senses or could it be hologram and that the catalyst is very far away like how harbigner was controlling the collectors from far away in dark space then that means wether we beat the reapers or not the catalyst will continue to make new reapers and send them through dark space every 50 thousand years

This could spand endless sequels with randomly new heroes and news races every 50 thousand years or so but playing a series where you never beat the main villian or it never ends yeah that would be my breaking point I don't want to see this great series end up like final fantasy with endless sequels that hold really no true point or where different final fantasy hold no true collective to the previous ones that came before

But yeah how can anyone not see the catalyst who created the reapers that have been destroying us and trying to destroy everyone in the galaxy as not being evil or someone or something that would try to deceive you or make you go down the paths that he want so that the reapers still win or survive it almost feels like a small portion of the fanbase forgot the whole purpose of why we united the galaxy to fight the reapers in the first place

I can't state this much more if you can't see where the major flaws are or that you love the endings then why are you here bubbles you got what you wanted and supposedly claim to be satisfied no need to come back here no more lol

These endings are really almost as teriible as final fantasy XIII-2 ending here

Just hope extended dlc will do something cause god this feels like a bad sore that just won't go away

[BlueStorm83]

JoJohnson117 wrote...

 Now I understand that there is no happy ending in war but there could have been a happier ending to this game.

Actually, there is a happy ending to war: It's somehow getting the people you care about out alive.  Maybe not all of them, maybe not even most of them.  A happy ending to war is being able to collapse in exhaustion and thank God that at least oneof the people you were fighting for will be okay.

In that regard, the current endings fail.  Yeah, you see that your crew is ALIVE, but stranded on some bizarre world isn't safe and sound, nor is it even Alright.

Your crew is magically stranded on some planet in that ending movie, right?  Garrus and Tali can't eat the same foods as Joker, Liara, and James.  At least two of your buddies'll die *SLOWLY* on that rock unless they're found before the Normandy's supplies run dry.  That can't be longer than two months.  That's not alright.  The survivors will have to watch their friends and colleagues slowly starve, while they themselves have plenty to eat, due to the Dextro/Levo amino acid thing.  That's WAY not alright.  Maybe the Normandy can make food, yeah?  A little more of that handy Space Magic, right???  WRONG: Mordin discounted the possibility of what was called "Cornucopia Technology" in Mass Effect 2.  Congratulate BioWare again.

Screw the victory fleet, the millions on the Citadel, the Billions on Earth, Tuchanka, Thessia, Sur'kesh, Palaven, and all the other home worlds: I was fighting for my CREW, and the ending basically tells me that any survivors will either slowly die or go through hell.

Thanks again for sending us up the Magical Elevator to mee the Wizard Bwbfoolf (Stands for Badly Written Bull**** From Out Of Left Field) before shooting our favorite fictional universe straight to hell.

Oh, and BTW, the Citadel was my favorite space station ever, and I watched Star Trek DS9 AND Babylon 5.

[CAP198462]

 I didn't hate the ending. It is kind of episodic and it doesn't always mesh the episodes together well, but it is not terrible. Is it how one might want the game to end, no. On the other hand  it is very much in line with recent science fiction with the whole transhumanism thing. It was a bit more heady than  gamers were expecting, and that is writers obscessed getting involved with a topic that most people do not care about. Sorry guys, no hate from me but you fell into the trap of reading about raising your consciousness about an issue, and you assumed that because you care about it everyone else does. 

[Landon7001]

Im just tired......so tired......so angry, so deflated, so betrayed, so confused, so much to say.......but all of you are doing such an eloquent/articulate job ill just keep reading your posts....i will ask bioware: change the ems requirements, get rid of the tie in that forces you to play multiplayer, out asie your greed and think of all your loyal fans and liners of your pockets who dont have access to xbx live, its not cool,nor ight....and for the love of god at least have the option for our shepard to end up with our LI thanks good night

[3DandBeyond]

Landon7001 wrote...

Im just tired......so tired......so angry, so deflated, so betrayed, so confused, so much to say.......but all of you are doing such an eloquent/articulate job ill just keep reading your posts....i will ask bioware: change the ems requirements, get rid of the tie in that forces you to play multiplayer, out asie your greed and think of all your loyal fans and liners of your pockets who dont have access to xbx live, its not cool,nor ight....and for the love of god at least have the option for our shepard to end up with our LI thanks good night

Exactly.  MP was said by the devs not to be necessary, however...
On the xbox 360 there are free MP strategy guides you can download and one of the clearly says MP is needed for success in the single player campaign.  What about people that don't have a gold membership and can't biuy one or who live in a country where they can't access it?  Or others that don't play online because their connection is bad or just because they don't have the time or don't like to.  Nice going.

The choices made in 3 games should be reflected in the outcome of the game.  Why should someone who didn't gather too many assets and didn't really do too much in the game (no 3 games), get the same choices basically as someone who did everything?  There are some worse endings or you can end up with only 1 choice or 2 choices, but you still get the same basic cutscene-with maybe Earth vaporizing and different people stepping off the Normandy.  Big deal.

There should be endings that go from great to horrible with all that that means.

Modifié par 3DandBeyond, 19 mai 2012 - 03:07 .

[3DandBeyond]

CAP198462 wrote...

 I didn't hate the ending. It is kind of episodic and it doesn't always mesh the episodes together well, but it is not terrible. Is it how one might want the game to end, no. On the other hand  it is very much in line with recent science fiction with the whole transhumanism thing. It was a bit more heady than  gamers were expecting, and that is writers obscessed getting involved with a topic that most people do not care about. Sorry guys, no hate from me but you fell into the trap of reading about raising your consciousness about an issue, and you assumed that because you care about it everyone else does. 

Ok, not trying to start a fight but using the word "heady" implies people didn't expect intellectual thought in an ending.  I don't think you meant it so, but it is a bit insulting, especially given the discussion that takes place on these forums.  Literary professors have found fault with the structure, the context, the cohesiveness within the ending and I daresay they are "heady" thinkers.  Show me the intellect there. 

Show me the intellect in the idea that the created will always rebel against and thus destroy the creator, therefore the creators must be destroyed before the created can destroy them.  Again, not trying to be antagonistic, but this is stupid.  If within the game there was never a geth/quarian conflict or if Shepard could never reunite them (among other things-there might be a real creator/created point with the Krogans/Turians/Salarians as well), then maybe that sentence might not be so stupid.  No, it still would be.  Shepard was all about getting people together even if it was only to fight reapers. 

To your point about transhumanism.  No, that isn't it.  If you are referring to Synthesis, well look inside the game and see who espoused it.  Sovereign, Saren, even TIM and Cerberus in their relentless disgusting experiments.  But beyond that Mordin discusses it in relation to the Collectors and describes just how it leads to stagnation of all culture-right before he discusses art and music.  He describes how advancement comes from necessity and adversity-needing to move things, inventing the wheel.  He is talking about how it makes beings grow, within themselves for one thing.

And this is not a new concept in sci fi at all, it is as old as sci fi itself.  Even the term transhumanism is 50 years old.  But beyond that Synthesis gives no one else the choice at all, Shepard is given godhood in deciding this.  And it could be reasonably debated that that is exactly what the star kid reaper baby daddy wants.  He's not the nice guy in all this, trying to help Shepard.  He can't be-he's been sending Reapers to kill people.  That's not good.  Sovereign said the goal was perfection and synthesis, so it can be said the star kid's goal is the same.  I'd never do what that imp wants.  We accept some synthesis in the form of augmentation done even to Shepard, but as a decision force upon people, all people, no.  It isn't for the betterment of all, it just dilutes the uniqueness of the individual.  It creates one DNA which at least eventually would lead to lack of diversity as there'd be no need to adapt.  The star kid basically says it's the end of evolution.

And it isn't even that people don't want to get involved with the idea of synthesis, but they don't think in the context of these games that that is a sensible choice at all.  But neither are the others.  And the whole star kid/citadel/crucible piece is so disconnected from the games we've been playing that it's ridiculous.  You simply do not change the main characters at the very end of a story.  The reapers were the antagonist and in the last 5 minutes of the game, the star kid is.  Good writers don't ever do that.

Well, maybe you do mean to insult.  Your last statement is about consciousness-raising which again indicates you think everyone that disliked the ending is less highbrow than you.  Read more, write less and become informed before insulting others, please.