429 réponses à ce sujet

[Strike2k2]

CaptainZaysh wrote...

Wildhide wrote...

I think the whole "Happy Endings aren't suppose to happen" speaks a lot more about Western Cultures current trend towards grimdark as the way to go than anything.  And the idea that people can't have happy endings or if they like them they're somehow wrong or bad.

I don't get what's grimdark about it.  Yeah, we're going to lose some colonies.  Yeah, we have enormous challenges in rebuilding and minimising post-war casualties.

Is that really grimdark these days?  Is that how pampered we are?

I think the point i'm trying to make is, why is grimdark all we are aloud to have? It's a interactive videogame. Not a real life sim. I'm sure people play games because they are fun and get to be the hero. Are the endings realistic? Sure. Are they fun? No. These endings aren't fun. Not by a long shot.

[Strike2k2]

CaptainZaysh wrote...

majormajormmajor wrote...

I find it disturbing that the prospect of millions to billions dead from starvation elicts so little of an emotional response.

I agree, starvation sucks, but dude!  They were going to be turned into zombies!

Some people need to get a sense of perspective here.

Starvation and zombification.......... Are you a troll? lol

What you just said really made me scratch my head.

[CaptainZaysh]

Strike2k2 wrote...

Starvation and zombification.......... Are you a troll? lol

What you just said really made me scratch my head.

I meant that out of these two scenarios:

(1)  Some starve

(2)  Everybody dies

...that scenario (1) is way better.  I get that it sucks that we will lose people after the war.  I get that it sucks that we can't just nip across to Omega in less time than it takes me to get to New York.

I'm just saying that those are pretty small prices to pay for freeing galactic civilisation from the Reapers.  And in the scheme of things, I'm really not sure that those things qualify as "grimdark", except to the most pampered crybabies there ever were.

[CaptainZaysh]

majormajormmajor wrote...

CaptainZaysh wrote...

That's exactly what I'm asking.

Explain how you got from "dust and smoke is a breathing hazard across much of the planet" to "turians can no longer live here".

You could probably also still breathe the air around the Chernobyl NPP in 1986. Would you do it and still expect to live for much longer afterward?

And the dust over Palaven is radioactive because...

[Strike2k2]

CaptainZaysh wrote...

Strike2k2 wrote...

Starvation and zombification.......... Are you a troll? lol

What you just said really made me scratch my head.

I meant that out of these two scenarios:

(1)  Some starve

(2)  Everybody dies

...that scenario (1) is way better.  I get that it sucks that we will lose people after the war.  I get that it sucks that we can't just nip across to Omega in less time than it takes me to get to New York.

I'm just saying that those are pretty small prices to pay for freeing galactic civilisation from the Reapers.  And in the scheme of things, I'm really not sure that those things qualify as "grimdark", except to the most pampered crybabies there ever were.

Ahh ok. I see what you mean about grimdark. But look at it from this perspective. Are those the type of endings we expect to see in a game where we get to be the "Hero" character from now on? You win, but everything is going to suck for a very long time for everyone. So i'll go back to my previous statement. Is that fun? No.

[CaptainZaysh]

Strike2k2 wrote...

Ahh ok. I see what you mean about grimdark. But look at it from this perspective. Are those the type of endings we expect to see in a game where we get to be the "Hero" character from now on? You win, but everything is going to suck for a very long time for everyone. So i'll go back to my previous statement. Is that fun? No.

I think it is.  I think that the worst thing that could have happened is for everything to just go back to normal after the Reaper invasion.  We just defeated the gods.  It's right that nothing should be quite the same.  It's also right that we can't use their gifts to us any more.  Now we need to find our own way back out into the galaxy.

I also find it fun to imagine solutions to the enormous problems the game leaves the survivors with.  Some problems, like the Citadel crashing into the Earth, are pretty trivial (you have a fleet full of engineers in orbit).  Others, like how the hell are the dextroes going to secure a food supply, are much more challenging and inspired me to read about meat cloning, and wonder about journey times to nearby stars under standard FTL.  And yeah, I think sending me on journeys in my imagination is way more fun than a cheesy little PowerPoint slideshow where Ron Perlman tells me how the krogan went on to become the galaxy's greatest ballerinas or whatever.

[majormajormmajor]

CaptainZaysh wrote...

And the dust over Palaven is radioactive because...

You're really bad at this whole analogy thing, aren't you? Sh*t might not be radioactive but breathing in destroyed space age building material- especially for the next few decades- will be lethal. Look at how many 911 workers have lung problems today.

[dfstone]

CaptainZaysh wrote...

dfstone wrote...

No thats not true.  I just replayed that mission in ME2 last night, the Doctor says that destroying a relay releases the same amount of power as a Supernova.  That is exactly what she said.

She's hypothesising, based on her intention to ram it with a big rock.  Serious question: can you not understand that smashing a small planet into something might make it blow up in a different way from disabling it with an energy pulse sent from the network's central control unit?  Or are explosions just explosions to you?

You see it happen at the end of the mission.  The relay does explode and it does destroy the entire star system.  

I don't see a difference.  The relay exploded when it was hit by the asteriod and the relay exploded the same way when it was hit by the beam from the citadel in ME3.  It looked exactly the same to me.

Modifié par dfstone, 23 mars 2012 - 06:42 .

[mikelope]

Strike2k2 wrote...

Ahh ok. I see what you mean about grimdark. But look at it from this perspective. Are those the type of endings we expect to see in a game where we get to be the "Hero" character from now on? You win, but everything is going to suck for a very long time for everyone. So i'll go back to my previous statement. Is that fun? No.

My two cents:
It is. You just saved the galaxy. Life continues. The sacrifice just makes the victory more meaningful. Like Mordin's death and curing the genophage. Or Legion's death and having peace. Surely there are books and movies that are more depressing and had fun with it anyway. I don't see why games should be different.

Modifié par mikelope, 23 mars 2012 - 06:42 .

[Tleining]

CaptainZaysh wrote...


I also find it fun to imagine solutions to the enormous problems the game leaves the survivors with.  Some problems, like the Citadel crashing into the Earth, are pretty trivial (you have a fleet full of engineers in orbit).  Others, like how the hell are the dextroes going to secure a food supply, are much more challenging and inspired me to read about meat cloning, and wonder about journey times to nearby stars under standard FTL.  And yeah, I think sending me on journeys in my imagination is way more fun than a cheesy little PowerPoint slideshow where Ron Perlman tells me how the krogan went on to become the galaxy's greatest ballerinas or whatever.

i would agree with this, if it would have been ONE of the WILDLY DIFFERENT Options we were promised. But it's not. It's THE ONLY ending.

[CaptainZaysh]

majormajormmajor wrote...

CaptainZaysh wrote...

And the dust over Palaven is radioactive because...

You're really bad at this whole analogy thing, aren't you? Sh*t might not be radioactive but breathing in destroyed space age building material- especially for the next few decades- will be lethal. Look at how many 911 workers have lung problems today.

And yet Lower Manhattan has not been "wrecked beyond livability", has it?

This is the trouble with your apocalyptic prophesies - drill into any one of them and they collapse.  Of course the Citadel will crash into the Earth (never mind the fact it is surrounded by a fleet of engineers in starships); of course society will crumble without the mass relays (as though "instant interstellar travel" was at the very bottom of Maslow's Hierarchy of Needs); etc, etc.  Listen, you may be able to sway the Line Herders if you're emphatic enough, but you'll find critical thinkers may need a teensy bit more than you thumping the table.

[dfstone]

mikelope wrote...

My two cents:
It is. You just saved the galaxy. Life continues. The sacrifice just makes the victory more meaningful. Like Mordin's death and curing the genophage. Or Legion's death and having peace. Surely there are books and movies that are more depressing and had fun with it anyway. I don't see why games should be different.

Ya well life would have continued if no one did anything to the Reapers.  They don't kill everything, just some of the races. 

Lets just face facts...it was an extremely poorly written and thought out ending to the storyline.  There's no rationalizing it anymore people have dissected this ending from every possible angle based on the lore of the game. And it just doesn't make any sense.  

Bioware dropped the ball.  

[GoblinSapper]

Narrative corners! I am beginning to believe the endings were written because Bioware had written themselves into a narrative corner. They wanted to end Shepherds story definitively and continue using the universe. The Elephant in the room however is this Big Damn Hero that the players Shepherd represents from ME1-3, a universe shaping messianic figure of legend on par with King Arthur (or even more religious figures, if your so inclined).

There would be too many variables in every persons shepherd to ever address him, and this figure would loom and overshadow everything the player did. So they needed a world where Shepherd would be a dimly remembered legend or a non-factor. This presented them with some interesting non-choices: prequels, which could potentially snarl existing continuity as well as present a situation where technology and lore in universe had to logically -REGRESS- ((back to no thermal clips!)); or a Far Future where Shepherd is forgotten or legend, which would logically be -far- in advance of current Mass Effect's universe, effectively changing it completly. I believe they felt the only way they could re-use mass effect was to destroy it and bring about the "galactic dark age" (referenced in 'The Final Hours of Mass Effect"). Then, after the Big Damn Timeskip © of 10,000 years to the time of the 'Stargazer' figure, technoligy could have re-evolved or been rediscovered to Mass Effect's scale.

This also allowed them to handle niggling issues like the Krogan, Geth, and Quarians whose fates might not or could not match what players did in ME3, by essentially whiping the universe clean by making -everyone- extinct or simply 'uncontacted' and isolated off in their own parts of the universe. I expect that if/as Bioware carries the series forward, the next Mass Effect will have entirely new species and civilizations with only faint references to the old ones (as the Protheans were in ME1-3). Thoughts?

[mikelope]

dfstone wrote...

Ya well life would have continued if no one did anything to the Reapers.  They don't kill everything, just some of the races. 

Lets just face facts...it was an extremely poorly written and thought out ending to the storyline.  There's no rationalizing it anymore people have dissected this ending from every possible angle based on the lore of the game. And it just doesn't make any sense.  

Bioware dropped the ball.  

Life does exist but the reapers are still there. So you lost the game.

I'm not defending the ending of ME3, which did not make sense once the boy appeared. I'm just defending the hypothetical of ending the reapers but having a galactic dark age and why that scenario isn't that grim. It's bittersweet.


edit: maybe a tad harsher than bittersweet. But acceptable to me.

Modifié par mikelope, 23 mars 2012 - 06:53 .

[Tleining]

CaptainZaysh wrote...

majormajormmajor wrote...

CaptainZaysh wrote...

And the dust over Palaven is radioactive because...

You're really bad at this whole analogy thing, aren't you? Sh*t might not be radioactive but breathing in destroyed space age building material- especially for the next few decades- will be lethal. Look at how many 911 workers have lung problems today.

And yet Lower Manhattan has not been "wrecked beyond livability", has it?

This is the trouble with your apocalyptic prophesies - drill into any one of them and they collapse.  Of course the Citadel will crash into the Earth (never mind the fact it is surrounded by a fleet of engineers in starships); of course society will crumble without the mass relays (as though "instant interstellar travel" was at the very bottom of Maslow's Hierarchy of Needs); etc, etc.  Listen, you may be able to sway the Line Herders if you're emphatic enough, but you'll find critical thinkers may need a teensy bit more than you thumping the table.

listen, if you're calling yourself a critical thinker, you might wanna think about things a bit more. The 911 Workers had to deal with dust caused by material from two Planes, two skyscrapers and a few other buildings that were damaged. On Palaven you have a dustcloud caused by massive global destruction. (oh, and eezo, very healthy)

Modifié par Tleining, 23 mars 2012 - 06:53 .

[RiouHotaru]

The galaxy was far too dependent upon the Mass Relays to begin with. Since they were all part of the carefully elaborate trap, getting rid of them and starting from scratch was the sensible thing to do.

And besides, conventional FTL is still a very viable option.

[CaptainZaysh]

dfstone wrote...

You see it happen at the end of the mission.  The relay does explode and it does destroy the entire star system.  

Yes, because she rammed it with an asteroid, causing the result she expected.

dfstone wrote...
I don't see a difference.  The relay exploded when it was hit by the asteriod and the relay exploded the same way when it was hit by the beam from the citadel in ME3.  It looked exactly the same to me.

I just rewatched them both and I have to say I'm surprised you couldn't see a difference.

- The Arrival relay was smashed apart by a big asteroid.

- The Sol relay received a signal that made it discharge its energy into the network, then the remains exploded.

If you understand that explosions are caused by the rapid release of energy then you really ought to be able to theorise as to why these two explosions are likely to have different results.

[majormajormmajor]

RiouHotaru wrote...

And besides, conventional FTL is still a very viable option.

JESUS CHRIST MY SIDES

Yes, our "IT TAKES THIRTY YEARS TO CROSS THE GALAXY IN DIS B*TCH" FTL will be a viable option to replace the mass relay network.

CaptainZaysh wrote...

And yet Lower Manhattan has not been "wrecked beyond livability", has it?

>two buildings knocked over
>"lower Manhattan's unlivable!"

critical thinker my bleeding arse

CaptainZaysh wrote...

This is the trouble with your apocalyptic prophesies - drill into any one of them and they collapse.  Of course the Citadel will crash into the Earth (never mind the fact it is surrounded by a fleet of engineers in starships); of course
society will crumble without the mass relays (as though "instant
interstellar travel" was at the very bottom of Maslow's Hierarchy of
Needs); etc, etc.  Listen, you may be able to sway the Line Herders if
you're emphatic enough, but you'll find critical thinkers may need a
teensy bit more than you thumping the table.

And yet still more believable than overly optimistic prognostications which require a good deal of hopeful speculation to realise

Telling us "it will all be better just because' hasn't been very convincing either. And it seems more people are inclined to believe me, from the numbers

Modifié par majormajormmajor, 23 mars 2012 - 07:00 .

[CaptainZaysh]

Tleining wrote...

listen, if you're calling yourself a critical thinker, you might wanna think about things a bit more. The 911 Workers had to deal with dust caused by material from two Planes, two skyscrapers and a few other buildings that were damaged. On Palaven you have a dustcloud caused by massive global destruction. (oh, and eezo, very healthy)

Notice how I didn't use "Earth is not wrecked beyond livability" in my example; I kept it to the few blocks around Ground Zero.

If he (or you) want to convince me that Palaven's atmosphere has been "wrecked beyond livability" - which is the point he was trying to establish - then you will have to do more than remind me that 9/11 led to respiratory problems.  Seriously, I can be convinced if shown the right evidence.  So far, no dice.

Eezo pollution is a very interesting observation.  I wonder what effect it would have?

[dfstone]

CaptainZaysh wrote...

dfstone wrote...

You see it happen at the end of the mission.  The relay does explode and it does destroy the entire star system.  

Yes, because she rammed it with an asteroid, causing the result she expected.

dfstone wrote...
I don't see a difference.  The relay exploded when it was hit by the asteriod and the relay exploded the same way when it was hit by the beam from the citadel in ME3.  It looked exactly the same to me.

I just rewatched them both and I have to say I'm surprised you couldn't see a difference.

- The Arrival relay was smashed apart by a big asteroid.

- The Sol relay received a signal that made it discharge its energy into the network, then the remains exploded.

If you understand that explosions are caused by the rapid release of energy then you really ought to be able to theorise as to why these two explosions are likely to have different results.

I don't.  I saw both relays breaking apart and then a massive explosion shooting out.  Now I suppose with this Space Magic nonsense maybe the ME3 relay explosion had special space magic properties and didn't actually destroy anything...though it makes you wonder how if it was a "harmless" explosion then why did it cause the Normandy to crash?  Its still a ****** way to end the storyline.

[majormajormmajor]

[quote]CaptainZaysh wrote...

If he (or you) want to convince me that Palaven's atmosphere has been "wrecked beyond livability" - which is the point he was trying to establish - then you will have to do more than remind me that 9/11 led to respiratory problems.  Seriously, I can be convinced if shown the right evidence.  So far, no dice.[/quote]


[quote]CaptainZaysh wrote...

[quote]
The dust and smoke from pulverised cities is now a breathing hazard across much of the planet.[/quote]

[/quote][/quote]

[quote]CaptainZaysh wrote...
:-D

Okay, I'll grant you that the dust cloud on Palaven may cause long term health issues to those who breathe in a lot of it. 
[/quote]

Modifié par majormajormmajor, 23 mars 2012 - 07:02 .

[CaptainZaysh]

majormajormmajor wrote...

JESUS CHRIST MY SIDES

Yes, our "IT TAKES THIRTY YEARS TO CROSS THE GALAXY IN DIS B*TCH" FTL will be a viable option to replace the mass relay network.

When you've stopped laughing, I'll be still going.  At the guy who doesn't think the ability to cross the galaxy in thirty years would make interstellar society viable.

(snipped your bit about 9/11 - addressed above)

majormajormmajor wrote...
And yet still more believable than overly optimistic prognostications which require a good deal of hopeful speculation to realise 

Telling us "it will all be better just because' hasn't been very convincing either. And it seems more people are inclined to believe me, from the numbers

No, if you'd read your Aristotle you'd be able to know the difference in wisdom between saying (a) outcome X will definitely occur and ( actually, there are many different possible outcomes.  You'd also know argumento ad populem to be the resort of a man losing an argument.

[CaptainZaysh]

[quote]majormajormmajor wrote...

[quote]CaptainZaysh wrote...

If he (or you) want to convince me that Palaven's atmosphere has been "wrecked beyond livability" - which is the point he was trying to establish - then you will have to do more than remind me that 9/11 led to respiratory problems.  Seriously, I can be convinced if shown the right evidence.  So far, no dice.[/quote]


[quote]CaptainZaysh wrote...

[quote]
The dust and smoke from pulverised cities is now a breathing hazard across much of the planet.[/quote]

[/quote][/quote]

[quote]CaptainZaysh wrote...
:-D

Okay, I'll grant you that the dust cloud on Palaven may cause long term health issues to those who breathe in a lot of it. 
[/quote]

[/quote]

"Long term health issues" = "wrecked beyond livabilty"?  Talk about grasping.

[CaptainZaysh]

dfstone wrote...

I don't.  I saw both relays breaking apart and then a massive explosion shooting out.  

Ah.  Well, if you watch them again, you'll notice that in ME3 there is an enormous discharge of energy before the relay explodes.

dfstone wrote...
Now I suppose with this Space Magic nonsense maybe the ME3 relay explosion had special space magic properties and didn't actually destroy anything...

Actually I would say "explosions are explosions" is more space magic than physics.

dfstone wrote...
though it makes you wonder how if it was a "harmless" explosion then why did it cause the Normandy to crash?  Its still a ****** way to end the storyline.

I think the Normandy crashed because it was mid-relay jump.  Did you see the "tunnel" effect around the ship, which seemed to be collapsing?  Not like the blast wave from an explosion at all as I remember.

[Tleining]

CaptainZaysh wrote...

Notice how I didn't use "Earth is not wrecked beyond livability" in my example; I kept it to the few blocks around Ground Zero.

If he (or you) want to convince me that Palaven's atmosphere has been "wrecked beyond livability" - which is the point he was trying to establish - then you will have to do more than remind me that 9/11 led to respiratory problems.  Seriously, I can be convinced if shown the right evidence.  So far, no dice.

Eezo pollution is a very interesting observation.  I wonder what effect it would have?

Right, because you shouldn't have to convince me of your opinion, because that's fact/your imagination.......wait, there's a difference.

see, that's the point. All we can do is imagine what it could be. But that's not why i bought the game. I bought the game to see how Bioware would be bringing this Epic Saga to an end. How would they answer all the questions that they promised answers to. Would i have allowed my imagination to run wild afterwards, hell yeah. I'm doing that right now. But i could have done that without buying ME3.

What i can take from Biowares conclusion of the story is: Relays blow up, 10.000 years later people who are at least partly the offspring of the Normandy Crew still haven't re-developed Spaceflight Capabilities.

To me, that's a massive Galactic Dark Age where apparently no one managed to find these people.