429 réponses à ce sujet

[Shallyah]

Ieldra2 wrote...

Shallyah wrote...
The worst of all is that the Galactic Dark Age scenario only really pays off if you choose "Destroy" ending. The other two scenarios bring a Galactic Dark Age, and the Reapers are still about to eat your babies whenever they feel like it.

Well, that's not true. Every ending stops the Reapers from reaping. I think the Synthesis gives a better chance for rebuilding since people are now part synthetic and the knowledge contained in the Reapers will eventually be available.

That doesn't change that a dark is depressing.

They stop reaping... for now.

I don't feel comfortable sleeping in a cage with a lion, even when the lion is sleeping. Chances are it'll wake up at some point.

[Esoretal]

Adanu wrote...

Esoretal wrote...

Adanu wrote...

Hackett described what was going to likely happen at the beginning.

You were building a giant fleet and army for one singular purpose; delivering the Crucible to fight the Reapers. There is no way you can destroy ALL the reapers without it. Sure, you can take a few dozen of them down... but that's a dozen out of hundreds.

You were basically creating the largest distraction operation in galactic history. A spear to punch through the Reapers to deliver the payload.

The whole point of the speech was to give hope. To actually inspire people to fight despite knowing how many were going to die.

Did you pay attention during the final fight? You BARELY took down that destroyer Reaper and that was with the FULL MIGHT of the combined armies of the galaxy.

Seriously people, some intelligence here.

No need to go insulting people here.

Which Reaper are you talking about? The one on Rannoch? Because if I remember correctly, only the Quarian fleet was present there.

No, on Earth. That Reaper blocking the conduit beam. It was a destroy type and you barely managed to destroy it. The one on Rannoch took the ENTIRE QUARIAN FLEET.

Those alone should tell you your chances of dealing with hundreds of Sovereign class Reapers without the Crucible.

I'm pretty sure that Shep and her squad took out the Reaper cannon singlehandedly. But semantics, shmemantics. 

[OverdrivenI]

Adanu wrote...

No, on Earth. That Reaper blocking the conduit beam. It was a destroy type and you barely managed to destroy it. The one on Rannoch took the ENTIRE QUARIAN FLEET.

Those alone should tell you your chances of dealing with hundreds of Sovereign class Reapers without the Crucible.

Not to mention the Destroyer class reaper has the weakness of shooting it in the laser part. From what I've seen of the Sovereign classes, and Harbinger at the end, they didn't shoot the laser the from the same place, they didn't have that weakness so they would be even harder to take down like Sovereign was in ME1.

[JunMadine]

If the dark age must happen what will happen on earth? The victory fleet? The dextro DNA species? The cured Krogan on earth? The human hating batarians stuck on earth? The rest of the galaxy? Can't the Normandy not leave the battle and stay in Sol system? Are there any survivors from Citadel? Can't we save or at least try to save them? If destroy ending chosen how does Shepard survive Citadel destruction?

Too many questions, too many.

[Tregon]

Again people, before you say "our tech is fine", scale the matter to our existing society.

Does your city have resources, knowledge and facilities to start building combustion engines from scratch if suddenly you were cut off from rest of the planet? Could you feed yourselves while doing those engines?

[Adanu]

Esoretal wrote...

Adanu wrote...

Esoretal wrote...

Adanu wrote...

Hackett described what was going to likely happen at the beginning.

You were building a giant fleet and army for one singular purpose; delivering the Crucible to fight the Reapers. There is no way you can destroy ALL the reapers without it. Sure, you can take a few dozen of them down... but that's a dozen out of hundreds.

You were basically creating the largest distraction operation in galactic history. A spear to punch through the Reapers to deliver the payload.

The whole point of the speech was to give hope. To actually inspire people to fight despite knowing how many were going to die.

Did you pay attention during the final fight? You BARELY took down that destroyer Reaper and that was with the FULL MIGHT of the combined armies of the galaxy.

Seriously people, some intelligence here.

No need to go insulting people here.

Which Reaper are you talking about? The one on Rannoch? Because if I remember correctly, only the Quarian fleet was present there.

No, on Earth. That Reaper blocking the conduit beam. It was a destroy type and you barely managed to destroy it. The one on Rannoch took the ENTIRE QUARIAN FLEET.

Those alone should tell you your chances of dealing with hundreds of Sovereign class Reapers without the Crucible.

I'm pretty sure that Shep and her squad took out the Reaper cannon singlehandedly. But semantics, shmemantics. 

.... I can't even...

Ok. Were you blind when that army in the buildings started firing all around you? Were you blind when Your left flank collapsed and suddenly you had a huge influx of husks coming at you?

Seriously. That's just being obtuse. You didn't single handedly do anything. you had support from the GIANT ****ING ARMY YOU BUILT THROUGH THE GAME.

god damn, if this is the intelligence level of the liners now, no wonder I lost respect for most of you.

Modifié par Adanu, 23 mars 2012 - 12:07 .

[majormajormmajor]

Thornquist wrote...

Relays can be rebuild

And you know this how? Everything in the game points to this being unlikely. And even if they can be rebuilt, it's going to take time that civilization doesn't have.

Oh yeah, and guy one post above- reported.

Modifié par majormajormmajor, 23 mars 2012 - 12:08 .

[iamthedave3]

The crucible should have weakened the reaper fleet, not outright destroyed it, so those war assets you gathered could - in the end - have been relevant. So galactic unity is needed to actually win the war, while the crucible just makes the fight winnable.

As it stands, Shepherd and hammy the space hamster could have won the war on their own.

[OverdrivenI]

 Another thought. They can't do a Mass Effect post destruction because it couldn't be called Mass Effect. Isn't the whole point that the technology derived from protheon ruins/relays/citadel is what gave all the races their technology. If that is all destroyed thanks to the star child then that technology will likely not be developed again because most of it (except protheon) was reaper technology. Thus the whole Mass Effect thing is completely lost.

Basically any future games will have to be a prequel.

Modifié par OverdrivenI, 23 mars 2012 - 12:10 .

[Adanu]

majormajormmajor wrote...

Thornquist wrote...

Relays can be rebuild

And you know this how? Everything in the game points to this being unlikely. And even if they can be rebuilt, it's going to take time that civilization doesn't have.

Oh yeah, and guy one post above- reported.

The Reapers made them somehow. We lost need to learn how.

[The Lightspeaker]

Candidate 88766 wrote...

The fact that there is any of this civilization still standing at the end of the war is nothing short of a miracle

Missing the point. There isn't anything left of civilisation. Theres people still ALIVE, but civilisation as a whole in mass effect relies heavily on interstellar access which is now gone.

Cue trillions more deaths, violence, wars, entire planets bleeding themselves dry for the last drops of resources.

Survival is not "living".

Lugaidster wrote...

kyrieee wrote...

It's storytelling, not realism
The people 10,000 years from now are not tangible, you don't feel good for saving them. Your emotional connection to the story is had through the characters. It's them we want to save, unrealistic or not.

Agree completely. There's this quote from Mordin that I've been using to illustrate that exact same idea:

"Hard to imagine galaxy. Too many people. Faceless. Statistics. Easy to depersonalize. [...] For this fight, want personal connection. Can't anthropomorphize galaxy. But can think of favorite [people]. Fighting for [them]." 

Can't even say how much I agree with this and can't believe I've not expressed this sentiment in my blog yet. Massive oversight on my part.

What is it about these forums today? I've had three ideas for what to blog on in my daily blog tonight from comments other people have made and its only just lunch time. Its not even like i've been browsing solidly either because I'm working.

Modifié par The Lightspeaker, 23 mars 2012 - 12:10 .

[The Lightspeaker]

*edit double post*

Modifié par The Lightspeaker, 23 mars 2012 - 12:10 .

[Clayless]

Hudathan wrote...

Destroying the relays is NOT a worse alternative to total annihilation. The whole game was dark and depressive, with literally every single character in the game facing destruction. The only slimmer of hope was that a mysterious device of immense power can do something epic enough to stop the Reapers. All of this was woven into the entire third game, they did not 'change the tone' of the game in the ending. Fighting the Reapers was not going to be like blowing up Harbinger's lackies and the game makes this painfully clear right from the get go.

You said it.

I have no idea how no one noticed this. In fact Hackett point blank says they have no hope of winning the final fight just before the final fight.

[Shalewind]

Well, if a Galactic Dark Age is truly the only option then I have a few comments:
  1) It is not uplifting at all – it isn’t bittersweet – it’s sour - it isn’t a new start – it’s a collapse – a descent into something far worse than what the galaxy had achieved before with only a tiny hope of emerging again.
  2) Your actions for saving one race or one person or anything – don’t really matter. No one is going to see each other or affect each other and billions are going to die in the coming suffering. Better to have died in the war.
  3) I’d have no interest in playing ANY DLC in this case. Pre-Ending DLC would be pointless. Post Ending DLC would be depressing grim and not optimistic.

[Esoretal]

Adanu wrote...

.... I can't even...

Ok. Were you blind when that army in the buildings started firing all around you? Were you blind when Your left flank collapsed and suddenly you had a huge influx of husks coming at you?

Seriously. That's just being obtuse. You didn't single handedly do anything. you had support from the GIANT ****ING ARMY YOU BUILT THROUGH THE GAME.

god damn, if this is the intelligence level of the liners now, no wonder I lost respect for most of you.

Stop insulting my intelligence. I could be wrong, it's been over a week since I finished the game. I'm done debating this with you if this is the kind of attitude you're going to have.

Modifié par Esoretal, 23 mars 2012 - 12:13 .

[Adanu]

Esoretal wrote...

Adanu wrote...

.... I can't even...

Ok. Were you blind when that army in the buildings started firing all around you? Were you blind when Your left flank collapsed and suddenly you had a huge influx of husks coming at you?

Seriously. That's just being obtuse. You didn't single handedly do anything. you had support from the GIANT ****ING ARMY YOU BUILT THROUGH THE GAME.

god damn, if this is the intelligence level of the liners now, no wonder I lost respect for most of you.

Stop insulting my intelligence. I could be wrong, it's been over a week since I finished the game. I'm done debating this with you if this is the kind of attitude you're going to have.

This much I can understand, and if you don't remember I apologize.

As it is, you had an army around you helping. YOu didn't do it alone.

[Candidate 88766]

The Lightspeaker wrote...

Candidate 88766 wrote...

The fact that there is any of this civilization still standing at the end of the war is nothing short of a miracle

Missing the point. There isn't anything left of civilisation. Theres people still ALIVE, but civilisation as a whole in mass effect relies heavily on interstellar access which is now gone.

Cue trillions more deaths, violence, wars, entire planets bleeding themselves dry for the last drops of resources.

Human civilization existed for centuries before the Relays were discovered. Likewise for every other species.

A galactic-scale civilization cannot exist for the time being. But individual civilzations can. 

There will be pain, and there will be suffering. A war against the Reapers shouldn't be something you get over in a few decades. 

Survival is not "living".

Isn't it?

[Gyroscopic_Trout]

If this weren't a game about choice, and if the ending didn't invalidate or outright negate all those choices, then yes, I'd say it would be worth it.

Don't sell me a game that promised different endings, then present me with my choice of balsamic vinegar or raspberry vinigrette on my turd salad.

[Lili77]

IMO however we stop the reapers we are left with a shattered galaxy. The reapers already have comitted genocide. The result will always be some kind of "dark age".

Lugaidster wrote...

I think a galactic dark age is both
grim and beautiful, bitter-sweet if you will. If the crucible offered
better choices, it would be an acceptable outcome.

Agree although beautiful or bitter-sweet is very subjective. A matter of taste.

kyrieee wrote...

It's storytelling, not realism
The people 10,000 years from now are not tangible, you don't feel good for saving them. Your emotional connection to the story is had through the characters. It's them we want to save, unrealistic or not.

Agree with that.

I believe my main concern is the way an open end like this is introduced in this game.

Modifié par Lili77, 23 mars 2012 - 12:21 .

[Tregon]

Candidate 88766 wrote...
Human civilization existed for centuries before the Relays were discovered. Likewise for every other species.

A galactic-scale civilization cannot exist for the time being. But individual civilzations can. 

There will be pain, and there will be suffering. A war against the Reapers shouldn't be something you get over in a few decades. 

Human civilization centuries before relays were discovered did not rely extremely heavily on relay based transit.
At point of ME3, human civilization (and all other known civilizations more or less) live and die with relay transit.

Go back couple centuries and our human civilization lived just fine without combustion engine and electricity.
Take them away now, and our society collapses totally.

Regression would be more harsh than to point of invention of combustion engine and electricity, it would throw us back good centuries as we rely so heavily on those two inventions.

[The Night Mammoth]

Our_Last_Scene wrote...

Hudathan wrote...

Destroying the relays is NOT a worse alternative to total annihilation. The whole game was dark and depressive, with literally every single character in the game facing destruction. The only slimmer of hope was that a mysterious device of immense power can do something epic enough to stop the Reapers. All of this was woven into the entire third game, they did not 'change the tone' of the game in the ending. Fighting the Reapers was not going to be like blowing up Harbinger's lackies and the game makes this painfully clear right from the get go.

You said it.

I have no idea how no one noticed this. In fact Hackett point blank says they have no hope of winning the final fight just before the final fight.

He also says he's prepared to fight the Reaper's conventionally if the Crucible fails.

There's enough a convincing case to believe you at least have a chance. 

What's the two things that the Reapers have always used that ensures their victory? The element of surprise, and the separation of the current civilization into smaller, easier to defeat, chunks, without the ability to coordinate or even communicate wtih each other. 

Neither of these things occur in this cycle. They can take out Earth, and Thessia, and Palaven, and Sur'Kesh, and Tuchanka, and the Migrant Fleet, and Rannoch, individually. 

But all together? We have a chance, because it's us fighting conventionally that makes the Reapers change their tactics. They've been wrong footed.

Regardless, a lot of people would prefer that we go out fighting because we choose to rather than have our fates imposed by a from the left field star kid with broken logic, and who's actual pressence and reveal mean we can end the cycle by destroying the Citadel. 

Fate against free-will, hope against inevitbillity, unity against separation. 

Themes key to the Mass Effect series are discarded. It's not a tragic, bittersweet, or fatalistic setting. It's optimistic despite the odds because of Shepard. 
Dark is fine, I'd be happy with everyone dead with civilization surviving by the skin of their collective teeth, with Shepard dead and the fleet and Earth utterly destroyed. That's dark, but civilization survives. 

The fact that no matter what happens, civilization is over, is needlessly dark in a setting with themes and tone which doesn't support it. 

Modifié par The Night Mammoth, 23 mars 2012 - 12:26 .

[worldwide]

One of the things that really irked me, and I've said this in a couple of other threads, is the fact that even if you choose to control the reapers you save all synthetics from death plus other reaper tech, including the citadel which they have said in previous games that it is pretty much a giant mass relay and that's how they usually get into the galaxy, but somehow the mass relays get destroyed, which in 2 they said destroying a relay caused an explosion that destroys the solar system it is in...so basically no matter what you choose you've destroyed every single homeworld out there as well as some pretty big colonies that just really didn't sit well with me

[charredrex]

majormajormmajor wrote...

A strange game.

The only winning move was not to play.

Out-smarting a computer AI programmed to wipe out all life on Earth through Global Thermonuclear War.  (love that movie)

And we don't even get to refute the AI of the Catalyst trying to do the same to the galaxy. No, we just go ahead and push the button because it says to.

[Poison_Berrie]

Warhawk7137 wrote...

1. People in this thread seem to be assuming that "dark age" necessarily means widespread massive extinction events and galactic anarchy, when it could very well just mean dissolution of galactic government mechanisms, breaking up of empires into smaller self-governing units, and economic depression, and it would still qualify as a "dark age."  There's no reason to assume that the galaxy will be the equivalent of Washington DC in Fallout 3 when it's just as, if not more, likely to be the equivalent of Nevada in Fallout New Vegas.

It won't be as apocalyptic as Fallout 3, but it will be pretty terrible. 
Chances are only garden worlds not effect or only slightly effected by the Reapers will get to live a relativally normal life. They likely have agriculture and infrastructure to sustain themselves and perhaps some nearby colonies. 

Planets hit hard by the Reapers are either already lifeless already or severly decimated, destruction has ravaged the ecology and conisdering the glows from orbit, fires are large enough to cover the planet in a blanket of dark clouds (a sort of nuclear winter). These planets are unlikely to sustain large populations or allow them to rebuild for decades (perhaps even causing extinction events).

On the topic of the Galactic Dark Age. I wouldn't be so opposed of it if they actually introduced it before.
Hint at it before you found out for certain and then be able to discuss it.
I think it's even more interesting than the final choice we are presented with if you build on it.
Do Shepard & Co tell everyone the consequence or do they keep it quiet? If the former you have to convince your allies, if the latter you have to convince your crew.
Or do take the third action and decide to go for the long game. Play a war of atrition and scorched earth with the Reapers, while also setting things up for the next cycle. Blow up Relays, fight battles you can win, use the crucible to wipe out Earth and the Reapers there. You won't win the cycle, but perhaps you can make preparations and do the Reapers damage for the next cycle to win. Succeed where the Protheans failed.

[Tregon]

Poison_Berrie wrote...

It won't be as apocalyptic as Fallout 3, but it will be pretty terrible. 
Chances are only garden worlds not effect or only slightly effected by the Reapers will get to live a relativally normal life. They likely have agriculture and infrastructure to sustain themselves and perhaps some nearby colonies. 

Assuming they have ability to build spare parts or completely new agricultural machines one way or another.

Else they regress to horse and plough society, scavenging old failed machinery for metal.

If they support colonies too, they need infrastructure for fuel for spaceships and making spare parts for them too.

I know I know... Taking into account need for maintenance of existing tech takes all fun out of survival scenarios.