319 réponses à ce sujet

[AlanC9]

Tirigon wrote...

Before the Reaper war that MAY have been possible. If you loook at how Earth, Palaven and all the other planets look, however, it is doubtful they can even build a common spaceship, let alon technology so advanced they could not figure it out for millenia.

The Reapers don't actually get to a whole bunch of inhabited planets. Check your map.

Modifié par AlanC9, 25 mars 2012 - 05:50 .

[Lightice_av]

crucible is destroyed when its discharge.

So? The plans and the materials are fine.

entire galactic fleet. multiple races vs ravaged earth to the point of resembling Tuchanka

Yep. Not the fault of the Crucible or the destruction of the Relays. That's the end result of the Reaper War, no matter what. But that doesn't mean that there is no hope of rebuilding.

according to this entry, technology is limited and STILL experimental

Doesn't matter as long as the major systems have it, and by all the evidence they do. Earth had several quantum entanglers, one used by a mere reporter, Emily Wong. Why would other planets be any worse? They only need one per major system to keep the vital communications going.

for someone so enamored of tragedy, you are remarkably optimistic about the reaper war outcome without relays.

That's because I think that good tragedy always has a ray of hope somewhere. Mass Effect is meant to be a bittersweet story of the defeat of a great evil at a great cost, but leaving hope of rebuilding and a better future.

And what about the Normandy crashing after getting hit by the Criucible beam?

They are currently trying to use a Mass Relay, though for what reason I am unsure. The negative mass tunnel collapses, causing the Normandy to crash. It has nothing to do with "high technology" being destroyed. EDI survives just fine and walks out with Joker if you chose Synthesis.

[Han Shot First]

Kakita Tatsumaru wrote...

Han Shot First wrote...
Absolutely.
The ending should not be filled with rainbows and butterflies. If Bioware were to alter or add to the existing endings in DLC, all of the endings should remain bittersweet. The most positive ending as far as the fate of the galaxy goes, should involve some sacrifice on the part of Shepard and his team.

So you mean they should discard one possible Shepard from ME2 and turn in into a sacrificial hero?
Besides, saying "happy ending" is equal to "rainbow and butterflies" is like saying the reaper's rampage managed to call into the galaxy the  mad wrath of the outer gods and then everyones suffers until the ends of time because it is a "bad" ending.
Does that happens in a "bad" ending? No. Would a "good" ending be "rainbows and butterflies"? No.

I'm saying that not everyone should live. Absolutely not.

It doesn't necessarily have to be Shepard, but Shepard and/or some of the squadmates should die at the end. If they alter the endings in DLC there should be no ending where galactic civilization survives while Shepard and his entire team makes it through unscathed. If Shepard lives, then there should be casualties among his squadmates.

It would simply be bad storytelling to build up the Reapers in the way they did, and then give the series a fairy tale ending. It would also be a poor fit thematically for the game.

That, and it is a simple fact that in war there is no victory without sacrifice. As Wellington famously said of his victory over Napoleon at Waterloo, "My heart is broken by the terrible loss I have sustained in my old friends and companions and my poor soldiers. Believe me, nothing except a battle lost can be half so melancholy as a battle won."

The finale of the game is set during the largest and most climactic battle in the history of all the Council civilizations combined. People should die.

[AlanC9]

jeweledleah wrote...
according to this entry, technology is limited and STILL experimental http://masseffect.wi.../The_Reaper_War entire clusters have gone dark, JUST from reapers destroying comm buoys.

for someone so enamored of tragedy, you are remarkably optimistic about the reaper war outcome without relays.

Could you check that link, and maybe use a link tag? I didn't get any text from that.

[Lightice_av]

Before the Reaper war that MAY have been possible. If you loook at how Earth, Palaven and all the other planets look, however, it is doubtful they can even build a common spaceship, let alon technology so advanced they could not figure it out for millenia.

Why do you think that? Hundreds of millions are dead, but billions are alive. Fabricating objects anywhere from weapons to tools, computers and entire buildings is easy and quick in Mass Effect universe, as is hydroponic farming. There's plenty of hope of rebuilding in a matter of decades.

[Tirigon]

AlanC9 wrote...


He says no such thing. I posted the link. Watch.

And where is the difference between synthethic life and normal high-tech? The only way to destroy them would be by wiping out the hardware that is required for an AI advanced enough to become sentient.

But who knows, maybe the Crucible is a galactic Death Note and takes away their souls or something. Would make sense I guess.

[AlanC9]

Lightice_av wrote...

Doesn't matter as long as the major systems have it, and by all the evidence they do. Earth had several quantum entanglers, one used by a mere reporter, Emily Wong. Why would other planets be any worse? They only need one per major system to keep the vital communications going.

However, there is a possibility that the QEC network was centralized on the Citadel, and so a lot of it could be gone. I think a sequel would be more interesting if the network was gone, and we're trying to recreate trade routes between the clusters without any real knowledge of what's going on at the other end.

[Lightice_av]

And where is the difference between synthethic life and normal high-tech?

Synthetic life appears to be based on very specific types of program and hardware choices in the Mass Effect universe. Presumably the radiation is aimed to only affect these. We are talking about a god-like entity here.

But this is still just one ending. In other two the whole question is a non-issue.

[AlanC9]

Tirigon wrote...
And where is the difference between synthethic life and normal high-tech? The only way to destroy them would be by wiping out the hardware that is required for an AI advanced enough to become sentient. 

But who knows, maybe the Crucible is a galactic Death Note and takes away their souls or something. Would make sense I guess.

It makes as much sense as making a distinction between synthetic and organic life in the first place. Yeah, not much.

[Tirigon]

AlanC9 wrote...

The Reapers don't actually get to a whole bunch of inhabited planets. Check your map.

Last time I did the Space Map was so overcrowded with them they were even in clusters you could NEVER visit.

Lightice_av wrote...

Why do you think that? Hundreds of
millions are dead, but billions are alive. Fabricating objects anywhere
from weapons to tools, computers and entire buildings is easy and quick
in Mass Effect universe, as is hydroponic farming. There's plenty of
hope of rebuilding in a matter of decades.

And where do you get those numbers from? the way it was presented in the game it was more like billions dead and a few millions remaining.

Also, reapers specifically targetted civilisation centers, industry and research centers. The survivors would therefore be mostly soldiers on the Fleet and people in remote, rural places, with the industry destroyed and scientists wiped out.

[Lightice_av]

However, there is a possibility that the QEC network was centralized on the Citadel, and so a lot of it could be gone.

It was not centralized anywhere. In fact it's not centralized at all. The quantum entanglers can only communicate between two points at a time. I am assuming that every major ship in the fleet had an entangler that contacts to their home world and nowhere else.

[jeweledleah]

I give up. I cannot talk to people who refuse to hear what I'm saying. it may be my own failing for not conveying what I mean, but somehow.. I don't think so.

to reiterate my answer to the OP. I would only be ok with Shepard dying if its one of the possible outcomes, not every outcome. same goes for destruction of relays.

[Lightice_av]

And where do you get those numbers from? the way it was presented in the game it was more like billions dead and a few millions remaining.

I'm estimating from the fact that the Reapers aren't in a hurry, and are willing to spend decades doing their reaping. They focus on eliminating the resistence, while converting the populace at a leisurely pace to avoid destruction of their precious raw material.

Also, reapers specifically targetted civilisation centers, industry and research centers. The survivors would therefore be mostly soldiers on the Fleet and people in remote, rural places, with the industry destroyed and scientists wiped out.

You forget the Crucible Project. It had the finest minds of the galaxy, and they should be just fine; no-one would dream of sending them to battle. And again, technology is way easier to fabricate in Mass Effect universe than it still is in our world.

[Tirigon]

AlanC9 wrote...

Tirigon wrote...
And where is the difference between synthethic life and normal high-tech? The only way to destroy them would be by wiping out the hardware that is required for an AI advanced enough to become sentient. 

But who knows, maybe the Crucible is a galactic Death Note and takes away their souls or something. Would make sense I guess.

It makes as much sense as making a distinction between synthetic and organic life in the first place. Yeah, not much.

If you look at it like you do, then yes, a difference between synthethic and organic life makes no sense.

That is exactly WHY I see the destruction of synthetics, but no harm to organics, as proof that their destruction is achieved by destroying all high-tech.

But of course that is a huge problem in this discussion - arguments change based on your EMS. if you have less than 1750, the Crucible beam actually DESTROYS EARTH AND ALL PEOPLE ON IT (go to 1:20), just because your Fleet is weaker. Makes sense.... not.

[Lightice_av]

I give up. I cannot talk to people who refuse to hear what I'm saying. it may be my own failing for not conveying what I mean, but somehow.. I don't think so.

I know what you mean just fine; you want everything to die, crash and burn because you hate the ending and can't see how there could be anything good in it. I point out the countless of ways how things can go well under the circumstances, following the narrative conventions typical to Mass Effect. We have an option of a kill all bad ending already; it would be pointless for the three true endings to repeat it.

[Lightice_av]

That is exactly WHY I see the destruction of synthetics, but no harm to organics, as proof that their destruction is achieved by destroying all high-tech.

As I said before, in ME universe the synthetic life is based on very specific types of programs and hardware. I can imagine that a god-like entity could develop radiation that only affects this type of technology, while leaving most other types untouched.

But of course that is a huge problem in this discussion - arguments change based on your EMS. if you have less than 1750, the Crucible beam actually DESTROYS EARTH AND ALL PEOPLE ON IT (go to 1:20), just because your Fleet is weaker. Makes sense.... not.

Yes it does. Your EMS goes to building the Crucible. If you don't have enough, then it's incomplete and poorly understood, and misfires, destroying all life in the galaxy.

[Getorex]

Lightice_av wrote...

Tirigon wrote...

They were meant to go there....

No, they had no choice but to go to Valinor because the Valar screwed up and evil gained a too great foothold in Middle-Earth to fix. Valar taking them there in the first place was a mistake on their part.

And how? ALL high tech is destroyed!

A remarkable claim, but supported by absolutely nothing in any of the endings. EDI is high technology, the last time I checked.

sigh, quantum entangler communicators were experimental technilogay ONLY installed on the normandy. planets don't have them. for normal communications , here - wiki entry for you.

SNIPAROO

Sigh yourself.  We have stargazer at the VERY ass end of the ending talking to the kid.  They are CLEARLY on the same planet that the Normandy crashed on.  They are clearly intended to show far, distant descendants of the Normandy crew surivivors of the crash.

First, there are not enough people on the Normandy for this.  EVERYONE on that planet is a brother or sister after only a few generations.  There is no way for stargazer and kid to exist, particularly as stargazer indicates that the details (of the stories of Shepard) are lost in history.  THAT means a REAL LONG TIME.  

Thus, stargazer is IMPOSSIBLE and so is the kid he is talking to. 

Furthermore (and worse for your Pollyanna take) is the kid asks about what he might find if he ever goes out to the stars.  Well, from that we conclude that they STILL haven't recovered to the point of interstellar travel!  BAD NEWS!  Incest is bad news 1, no interstellar travel in this distant future is bad news 2.  Wait!  There's MORE!  In answer to this kid's question, stargazer goes on about how many stars there are, how many planets, etc, so that what the kid might find?  The possibilities are endless.  

BUT THEY MUST ALREADY KNOW WHAT THEY WOULD FIND!  There were 3 aliens on the crew when it crashed.  THREE but the kid and stargazer appear to be totally ignorant of them AND their planets and civilizations.  Liara, well, she can breed with anyone so at the very least, there should have been a lot of blue descendants of Liara's kids (she DOES live for thousands of years, mind, and would likely mate with a number of people in that span).  BAD NEWS 3.  NO knowledge of aliens at all!  NONE.  NO blue people!  NONE.  

Therefore they don't even have quantum entanglement communication that could be used to instantaneously chat with people and aliens ANYWHERE in the galaxy!  These incest people are totally cut off from the galaxy and earth!  They do not have space travel to any useful degree.  They know of NO aliens.

And never forget that they are the spawn, every last one of them, of brother-sister love.  Kinky.

[Tirigon]

Lightice_av wrote...
Yes it does. Your EMS goes to building the Crucible. If you don't have enough, then it's incomplete and poorly understood, and misfires, destroying all life in the galaxy.

Erm, yea, I guess you can come up with explanations for everything. But that doesnt make them true, or at least convincing. EMS is you MILITARY STRENGTH (the name says it already, ffs) not HOW GOOD ARE PEOPLE AT REBUILDING ANCIENT TECHNOLOGY.

By the way, if we follow your explanation we have a huge problem seeing how Krogan, Turians, Jack, Jacob and all your old squad are War assets when they dont even work on it.

[Lightice_av]

Sigh yourself. We have stargazer at the VERY ass end of the ending talking to the kid. They are CLEARLY on the same planet that the Normandy crashed on. They are clearly intended to show far, distant descendants of the Normandy crew surivivors of the crash.

First, there are not enough people on the Normandy for this. EVERYONE on that planet is a brother or sister after only a few generations. There is no way for stargazer and kid to exist, particularly as stargazer indicates that the details (of the stories of Shepard) are lost in history. THAT means a REAL LONG TIME.

For this reason they can't be the descendents of the Normandy crew. As you say, too long time, too few people. Hence, the planet was either colonized before, or they made contact with other systems and were rescued. I prefer to take the discussion as metaphorical, not conveying ignorance of the universe but making a point of the vastness of the cosmos and all the wonders that can be found there. And who knows, the Synthesis end might have literally seeded every single planet with new kind of half-synthetic life.

[Iakus]

Lightice_av wrote...

Why is a romantic plot "pointless" because one party dies at the end again? Dig through Wikipedia and I'm sure that you can find hundreds of popular and famous novels where this happens. .Shepard sacrifices him/herself to save the galaxy, and to me the romance subplot gave this particular poignancy as it meant that my Shepard sacrificed herself extremely personal reasons, as well as to save the galaxy; why wouldn't a hero like Shepard want to die for those s/he loves, if that is the only way to save them?

It's bitter because Shepard dies on them twice.  Dying on a loved one gets old fast.  It's not bittersweet when it keeps happenening, it becomes bitter and cruel.

And while a hero like Shepard might be willing to die to save a loved one, to "hold the line" as it were, I'm sure there are others who would rather "get the job done and go home"

Shepard is not the Sam of Mass Effect. Shepard is Frodo. The main hero who takes the worst beating to spare the others the pain. Shepard is the messianic archetype, and those are rarely blessed with long life or happy ending. They give up their lives to ensure that others can live happily ever after.

Fine, how about Beren then?  One of the staples of Middle Earth mythology.  Maimed, ultimately died, but was restored to life to live out a peaceful, mortal existence in the end. 

[jeweledleah]

Lightice_av wrote...

I give up. I cannot talk to people who refuse to hear what I'm saying. it may be my own failing for not conveying what I mean, but somehow.. I don't think so.

I know what you mean just fine; you want everything to die, crash and burn because you hate the ending and can't see how there could be anything good in it. I point out the countless of ways how things can go well under the circumstances, following the narrative conventions typical to Mass Effect. We have an option of a kill all bad ending already; it would be pointless for the three true endings to repeat it.

taht's exactly what I'm talking about.  you are not hearing.  whatever.

[Lightice_av]

Erm, yea, I guess you can come up with explanations for everything. But that doesnt make them true, or at least convincing. EMS is you MILITARY STRENGTH (the name says it already, ffs) not HOW GOOD ARE PEOPLE AT REBUILDING ANCIENT TECHNOLOGY.

By the way, if we follow your explanation we have a huge problem seeing how Krogan, Turians, Jack, Jacob and all your old squad are War assets when they dont even work on it.

If you actually read about your war assets in the war room, you will find out that some of them are force to your fleet, while others are resources, technology and people who help to build the Crucible. For example, Kasumi has no intention to go to any kind of fight, but she applies her decryption skills for the Crucible. The fleet protects the Crucible during the final showdown, and if it's too weak, it can be inferred that they allow it to get damaged on the way, also with disastrous results.

[Iakus]

Lightice_av wrote...

I give up. I cannot talk to people who refuse to hear what I'm saying. it may be my own failing for not conveying what I mean, but somehow.. I don't think so.

I know what you mean just fine; you want everything to die, crash and burn because you hate the ending and can't see how there could be anything good in it. I point out the countless of ways how things can go well under the circumstances, following the narrative conventions typical to Mass Effect. We have an option of a kill all bad ending already; it would be pointless for the three true endings to repeat it.

Jeweled doesn't want everything to "die, crash, and burn".  As you ponted out, we already have the opportunity to incinerate Earth and everyone near it.  What she want to opportunity to craft an ending happier than what we got. Ideally, one where Shepard can survive and be reunited with friends/family/loved ones.  Not an unreasonable request.

[The Razman]

Tirigon wrote...

Alex_SM wrote...

The Razman wrote...

What are you talking about "if"? He does die.

No if you play enough multiplayer. 

The he gasps for breath in London's ruins.

The chances of surviving are slim at best even then. Hell, for all we know it could be hy DYING breath.

People here make no sense whatsoever.

"What, a VI made of light? It's a GOD CHILD, that makes no sense!! And what's this ... these choices to stop the Reapers? NO, NO SENSE! And the Normandy is in a slightly different location than I thought it was ... no no no no no, that makes no damn sense, none of this ending makes ANY sense!!! Wait ... Sheperd survived the biggest explosion in the history of humanity, fell down to Earth from space without a functioning space-suit, landed in a civilised part of the world and is still breathing? Now ... that makes sense."

What's wrong with you people? It's a secret scene to make us all ask each other "Ooo, you think he's really dead?!?!?" It's the equivilient of a big question mark after "The End". He dies. Sheperd dies. Sheperd is dead. Dead. Is. Sheperd. The end.

[Straw_foot]

 Only if choices I made caused it.