349 réponses à ce sujet

[ticklefist]

Watch a video of the Architect from The Matrix Reloaded. Now watch Starchild. Now watch the Architect again. The question isn't so much of him not making sense, it's that he's just lame and wholly unimpressive when compared to similar plot devices.

[lordnyx1]

CaFé87 wrote...

It is still possible for a synthetic civilization, that killed his organic creators to be the first culture who discovers the Mass Relays and Citadel after the Reapers killed all advanced civilizations.
They could just waltz through the galaxy and kill all those frog and monkey people without a problem, while the Reapers are hibernating in Dark Space.

Thats what Nazara was for, a vanguard left behind to make sure that kind of stuff never happened..

[CroGamer002]

squee913 wrote...

Also, I just realized... if the idea was to preserve the higher races by "Harvesting" them, why did the Reapers try to get the Geth to wipe out ALL of the Quarians? Where is the preservation in that?

Because Starchild was expecting for geth to be wiped out by quarians.



DON'T QUESTION STARCHILD'S LOGIC MAN!

[Yearlongjester]

How about why would the Reapers have a giant beam that goes straight up to the Citadel where someone might open up the arms and use their superweapon? Or why it wasn't heavily defended? Please explain that one to me, because I'm confused and you have all the answers.

[Dendio1]

CombustiblePanda wrote...

Dendio1 wrote...
Im waiting.....

I'm pretty sure this thread is about discussing the plot-holes without introducing a theory.

Well then im dissapointed. I have a clear plot hole and nobody wants to tackle it

Saul Iscariot wrote...

Dendio1 wrote...

Heres
a question. Anderson and shep were both part of the same run to the
citadel where harby blew up hammer squad. Sheps armor is in rags and his
face is torn up and bloodied. Anderson is clean as a whistle, no armor
damage, no damage at all.

Explain this plot hole
thanks

Indoctrination theory: give it a look

Have
you ever seen Ghostbuster just after they destroy Gozer's Staypuft
form?

 well there is this

Modifié par Dendio1, 27 mars 2012 - 07:34 .

[WizenSlinky0]

Bourne Endeavor wrote...

Relevant information that omitted makes the narrative contradictory. You are generalizing the necessity of information. In most circumstance we do not need to know much, but enough for logical flow to maintain. (ie. Character motives and etc) Shepard not bringing this up is another reason the scene is a plot hole. It is something relevant to the discussion, as it contradicts what the Catalyst claims, yet Shepard, who experienced it first hand, is not mentioning it.

Your rebuttal relies on the notion Shepard is essentially incompetent or deluded, regardless of exterior factors. Great, the fate of the galaxy rested upon the shoulders of a (wo)man who couldn't think straight. No wonder it turns out so bleak.

Except its logic only makes sense to itself, not Shepard, the Mass Effect or the player. Therefore, it becomes relevant. We have information contradicting what it claims but are never provided an opportunity to refute it. The Catalyst needs to explain why prior events do not apply to the current circumstance and Shepard must inquire if it does not. By denying this option, it becomes a plot hole.

It doesn't. It's not presented as factual information. It's coming directly from a character. Characters can lie, they can be wrong, etc. So even if they tell you something directly contradictory...if they honestly believe it, does it still make it a plothole? I don't think it does. Maybe I am generalizing it but I prefer to think of it as contextualizing it. Thinking of it in terms of the characters and their conditions.

Shepard is wounded, bleeding out, and in no state to think critically. I agree he should have had something to say. But I can consider a reasonable scenario where he doesn't based on the context of the situation (ie. barely alive, nevermind coherently thinking). It's not about being incompotent. It's about the fact he's severely injured. I think it provides a certain level of relief that our hero actually reaches that point to make a decision at all considering his state. Nevermind have a long-winded conversation about it.

Contextually, it makes sense. It may be sloppy writing, sloppy design, or something we just disagree with. But I personally would not call it a plothole in any form.

[squee913]

Mesina2 wrote...

squee913 wrote...

Also, I just realized... if the idea was to preserve the higher races by "Harvesting" them, why did the Reapers try to get the Geth to wipe out ALL of the Quarians? Where is the preservation in that?

Because Starchild was expecting for geth to be wiped out by quarians.



DON'T QUESTION STARCHILD'S LOGIC MAN!

This was sarcasm yes? Starchild saw that the Quarians had found a way to wipe out all the geth, so he made the Geth stronger so that the Quarians could then wipe out all the geth...

actually... that sounds like something he would say <_<

[Iconoclaste]

For the "Indoc theory" :

For a "meme" to be successful, only need to reiterate it. No need to justify it, that comes at a later stage. Most popular "memes" will reflect the biggest "consensus", hence have the best chance to be taken into account. Just bump the IT thread, and it will score.

Modifié par Iconoclaste, 27 mars 2012 - 07:37 .

[IndustrializedTaco]

Dendio1 wrote...

CombustiblePanda wrote...

Dendio1 wrote...
Im waiting.....

I'm pretty sure this thread is about discussing the plot-holes without introducing a theory.

Well then im dissapointed. I have a clear plot hole and nobody wants to tackle it

Saul Iscariot wrote...

Dendio1 wrote...

Heres
a question. Anderson and shep were both part of the same run to the
citadel where harby blew up hammer squad. Sheps armor is in rags and his
face is torn up and bloodied. Anderson is clean as a whistle, no armor
damage, no damage at all.

Explain this plot hole
thanks

Indoctrination theory: give it a look

Have
you ever seen Ghostbuster just after they destroy Gozer's Staypuft
form?

 well there is this

Space magic?

[garf]

But if he's the villian of the story Shepherd rolling over and taking him at his word is in itself, if not a plot hole, then an utter betrayal of her character. It makes no sense. If destroying the reapers is defying the starchild why would the starchild even mention it? It's a trap. sorry no.

[Selenora]

january42 wrote...

2. The Catalyst's Logic Makes No Sense

Not sure why people are having trouble understand the cycle thing. People keep saying "why do they use synthetics to kill organics to prevent synthetics from killing organics?" The answer - that's not what the Catalyst is saying at all.

The Reapers are "pruning" the populace and getting rid of only the most advanced civilizations and the synthetics (or taking over the synthetics.) This gets rid of the synthetics to prevent them from destroying ALL life and gets rid of the beings capable of producing more synthetics... for a time. They leave the young races. The idea is that in this way non-synthetics are never totally wiped out. Seems clear enough.

Also, using the possible Geth/Quarian peace as an example to say the Catalyst is wrong is silly. The Geth DID rebel against their creators at one point. The fact that Shepard (might have) brokered a peace doesn't change that, nor does it prevent other organics from making other synthetics in the future  that will rebel and destroy all organic life as the Catalyst fears. The Catalyst has seen this happen over and over. His reference point is not as limited as our experience.

Now, whether Shepard should just believe what the Catalyst says is another matter, but what he actually says is not illogical.

The Catalysts logic is like solving drunk driving by killing everyone when they reach the age of 16. 

Logic is a process that generates conclusions from premesis.  Insane peopel can be perfectly logical. Doesn't make them any less insane.


(Substitute whatever the driving test age is in your local area. I think 16 is the most common in the US).

Hmmm..i have been thinking to bring an example like this for a long time now... but i will drop it.......but....

I saw a documentary the other day about a woman  who  was betrayed by her lover, so she diceded to kill all her future lovers to prevent them from breaking up with her.....it makes perfect sense....i just wonder why ppl labeled her as a serial killer tho....weird.......hmmmmm mass effect3 writers must have seen the same docomentary as well.........thats would be an explanation.....

[DashRunner92]

Jonwes wrote...

I thought it would be good to have a thread to debunk some of the "plot holes" that people keep regurgitating because they saw the Angry Joe video or one of the articles that have ripped it off. The fact of the matter is that while there are surely things to be annoyed/disappointed with as far as the ending goes, there are some things people keep bringing up that really don't seem like an issue. There are two that are driving me nuts reading about again and again:

1. Why did the Illusive Man show up? How did he get to the Citadel?
People keep acting surprised that he showed up and wonder how he got there...

BUT

We are told the Illusive Man has gone to the Citadel. We are told this in the game. I wasn't surprised to see him there in the end because as we are raiding Cronos station we are specifically told that the Illusive Man is gone and that he's gone to the Citadel. I can't remember if Kai Leng or EDI said it in my play through, but it was specifically mentioned. He was there to use the Crucible for his own end game plans.

Except it closed while he was in there, at which point he would of been killed just like the other 100% of people (Except for some reason, there's still plenty of traffic around). Other than that, the only way would of been through the portal on Earth, which is highly unlikely considering the majority of the Reapers were at Earth with no war fleets to distract them. 

Modifié par DashRunner92, 27 mars 2012 - 07:44 .

[Wolfen Byte]

Anyone care to explain why the Mass Relay explosion in the Arrival DLC eradicates a star system, but the Technicolor Dreamcoat explosions don't even scratch the paint?

I call that plothole big enough to drive the Citadel through.

[WizenSlinky0]

garf wrote...

But if he's the villian of the story Shepherd rolling over and taking him at his word is in itself, if not a plot hole, then an utter betrayal of her character. It makes no sense. If destroying the reapers is defying the starchild why would the starchild even mention it? It's a trap. sorry no.

For the same reason Saren shoots himself and loses the fight for himself. Or why the villian in some stories returns your sword to you for an "honorable fight". Villians have the ability to evolve as characters as well...even when they are introduced in five minutes. And they are not colored the same. They aren't all mustache-twirling bad guys. I suppose the correct term I should be using is "Antagonist" as it isn't so loaded.

The reapers had already essentially lost the moment Shepard reached the Catalyst. He says it himself, "The fact you are here proves that my solution will no longer work".

EDIT: 

But, just for reference, I do consider it sloppy writing to have your antagonist explain how your weapon works to you. They really should have found out how to use it/what it does at a different part of the story.

Or at the very least explain that the Catalysts program was designed in such a manner as to allow this sort of thing.

Modifié par WizenSlinky0, 27 mars 2012 - 07:51 .

[asindre]

squee913 wrote...

Mesina2 wrote...

squee913 wrote...

Also, I just realized... if the idea was to preserve the higher races by "Harvesting" them, why did the Reapers try to get the Geth to wipe out ALL of the Quarians? Where is the preservation in that?

Because Starchild was expecting for geth to be wiped out by quarians.



DON'T QUESTION STARCHILD'S LOGIC MAN!

This was sarcasm yes? Starchild saw that the Quarians had found a way to wipe out all the geth, so he made the Geth stronger so that the Quarians could then wipe out all the geth...

actually... that sounds like something he would say <_<

I laughed way more than I should have at that:lol:

[FemmeShep]

Thread continues to lack credibility, as OP refuses to change or alter his OP about the AI logic being a plot hole. What he describes wasn't the plot hole people had with it anyways.

If OP refuses to listen, then what's the point discussing plot holes...



I'm joking. In all seriousness, I'm glad the thread took off away from OP, where people could discuss plot holes in general. 

Modifié par FemmeShep, 27 mars 2012 - 07:48 .

[squee913]

Wolfen Byte wrote...

Anyone care to explain why the Mass Relay explosion in the Arrival DLC eradicates a star system, but the Technicolor Dreamcoat explosions don't even scratch the paint?

I call that plothole big enough to drive the Citadel through.

The Alpha relay just did that because it hates Batarians

[DashRunner92]

Wolfen Byte wrote...

Anyone care to explain why the Mass Relay explosion in the Arrival DLC eradicates a star system, but the Technicolor Dreamcoat explosions don't even scratch the paint?

I call that plothole big enough to drive the Citadel through.

That's actually one of the few explainable things in the end. When the Mass Relay was destroyed in the DLC, Shepard used brute force in order to destroy it. The Mass Relays in the end were destroyed by magical space pulse, which I guess sort of "turns them off" before destroying them? 

[CroGamer002]

squee913 wrote...

Wolfen Byte wrote...

Anyone care to explain why the Mass Relay explosion in the Arrival DLC eradicates a star system, but the Technicolor Dreamcoat explosions don't even scratch the paint?

I call that plothole big enough to drive the Citadel through.

The Alpha relay just did that because it hates Batarians

Racist!

[boardnfool86]

Jackal7713 wrote...

boardnfool86 wrote...

Schrijver wrote...

Now try and debunk the Normandy running off with teleporting squadmates

This to me is the only true plothole - while technically 'possible' - given the timing it would require Joker to know ahead of time what the crucible firing would do - or at least it SEEMS that he would from what we see... maybe we're seeing a montage and the whole thing unfolds over hours and hours - but I didn't get that feeling

I can see the Normandy fleeing the shockwave... but picking up the reamining ground team? nope.

Did you even play the other two games? How come the catalyst, didn't show up until ME3? This question shows a major plot hole between ME 1 & ME 3

Yes, I've played the whole series numerous times... when would the hands off orginator of the reapers step in earlier? it wouldn't, the fact that it decides to finally intervene as Shep loses conciousness is a stretch.

[JeosDinas]

FemmeShep wrote...

Thread continues to lack credibility, as OP refuses to change or alter his OP about the AI logic being a plot hole. .

It isn't. Believing something to be flawed in its conception doesn't necessarily make it a plot hole. Nor does the existence of events in the game which disprove it constitue such a thing, particularly if there's no way to really use that to enact a change (and in the case of the Catalyst, we're outright told it refuses to/is unable to deviate from its program).

Then again, most people who strawman the logic tend to misunderstand or misrepresent it anyway...

[Avissel]

WizenSlinky0 wrote...
The reapers had already essentially lost the moment Shepard reached the Catalyst. He says it himself, "The fact you are here proves that my solution will no longer work".

Which he then follows up with "Here are my three new solutions, based solely on my logic which you are not allowed to refute."

"You can control us, even though I already control the Reapers, and could make them leave, you need to die in order to make them leave, because hey...screw you buddy."

"You force everybody to become cyborgs, which I think is totally cool so you should too."

"or you can blow us up...which honestly would be the same as controlling us becase ethier way we are gone, but we will also kill the Geth and Edi and you, because come on man...your gonna kill us...dick."

[Kulthar Drax]

In regards to the original poster's comment on the Catalyst doing it to prevent synthetics from taking over the galaxy/wiping out organics etc. Well, in Mass Effect 1, Saren and Sovereign both mention that the Geth will survive the coming invasion as they are "useful tools". So if they're useful enough to be kept around by the Reapers, then it sort of invalidates even more of the Catalyst's logic really XD

[Emberwake]

I've seen all matter of explanations for just about every plot hole in the game. Some make fair sense, others are absurd. In the end, even these explanations fall short. If we were intended to follow this logic, why isn't it better shown in the narrative? If you want audiences to specjlate and fill on tne blanks, then guide speculation through metaphor or draw parallels with other events.

The possibilities for plugging the plotholes are limitless, and that is a weakness, not a strength.!!

[The Angry One]

General Tiberius wrote...

Nothing is provable except mathematics.

There is an example of Synthetics turning on their masters in Mass Effect 3. Talk to Javik, hear about the Metacon war in which only a united Prothean Empire was able to start to turn the tide against Synthetics. Then the Reapers came, harvested the advanced organic life and destroyed the Metacons.

There are examples of synthetics turning, there are also examples of organics turning (the Rachni, the Krogan, the Yahg Shadow Broker, etc.).
Neither of which even hints that organic life is endangered. We also have examples of extremely pacifistic and cooperative synthetics in the Geth.

The point is, neither stance is outright provable but neither is disprovable, and this cycle just happens to have more evidence for synthetic co-existance than against.

What are these Prothean Cycle Hybrids you keep talking about?

The Zhu.. whatever the hell they're called. They started out as organics who slowly became more cyborg like until the machine parts took them over. However, they still have organic components. Hence, hybrids.