349 réponses à ce sujet

[Saul Iscariot]

FemmeShep wrote...

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. 

He did pop in to discuss some points then excused himself as his work break was drawing to a close. Maybe he will reconsider when he is free? Obviously I can't speak on his behalf, but I think being at work is a reasonable excuse for not posting.

[Xeranx]

gudman wrote...

Xeranx wrote...

Schrijver wrote...

Now try and debunk the Normandy running off with teleporting squadmates

It didn't happen.

But everyone who saw the ending, saw the normandy sequence. 

But is that sequence conclusive?  

Bear in mind that people say that Shepard heard comments about no one making it to the Citadel, but Shepard never reacts to those comments.  Why?  Why wouldn't Shepard respond if he/she is capable of hearing the chatter?  Also keep in mind that when Shepard hears this, he/she is standing.  No one on the ground saw that?  If I remember correctly, there were still ships flying around the area.  Why did no one correct the statements of no one making it?

[squee913]

Mesina2 wrote...

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!

You didn't know? Some Replay purposely shoot Batarian ships into a random sun... And don't even get me started on how they treat the Vorcha... They were considered the most beautiful race in the galaxy until they started using the mass relays.... 

[WizenSlinky0]

Avissel wrote...

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."

He is still the antagonist. He believes the eventuality will still occur. His statement essentially says, "You have rejected my cycle, so now you must choose how to proceed". He is done. He still disagrees with you but he's lost.

The fact remains if the cruicible is not used in the current context of the story then the reapers will just keep reaping. So, he gives you the options that the crucible will allow him to achieve. If anything it is a design flaw in the cruicible and the fact Bioware didn't want us to have any other choices. It has nothing to do with the Catalysts logic. Destroying the reapers is disputing his logic. The rest, for better or worse, is due to design and story choices. Not plotholes.

Modifié par WizenSlinky0, 27 mars 2012 - 07:54 .

[asindre]

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 might have something to do with the way it was destoyed. The crucible could have been made so the relays would be destroyed without blowing up the starsystem.
...Or it could be a plothole, or maybe Shepard just murdered more people than the reapers:mellow:

[The Angry One]

WizenSlinky0 wrote...

He is still the antagonist. He believes the eventuality will still occur. His statement essentially says, "You have rejected my cycle, so now you must choose how to proceed". He is done. He still disagrees with you but he's lost.

The fact remains if the cruicible is not used in the current context of the story then the reapers will just keep reaping. So, he gives you the options that the crucible will allow him to achieve. If anything it is a design flaw in the cruicible and the fact Bioware didn't want us to have any other choices. It has nothing to do with the Catalysts logic. Destroying the reapers is disputing his logic. The rest, for better or worse, is due to design and story choices. Not plotholes.

Destroying the Reapers is an idea it determines as a valid option and therefore follows it's logic.
It comes with the price tag of destroying all synthetic life including the Geth to "buy time". No doubt destroying the relays follows this logic too.

Do you think plot holes are an entity of their own, or a purposeful decision? Plot holes are created by design and story choices. Bad design and story choices.
It indicates that they didn't think this ending through at all.

[TheLastAwakening]

The Geth did not rebel until they were left no other choice. They first questioned whether or not this unit had a soul through consensus and then asked the creators. The genetic mutations, the Quarians weren't to happy their networked algorithm was acting as if were conscience and tried to put the Geth down.

Using the Geth and Quarian example as a reason the Catalyst is right is silly...

[WizenSlinky0]

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 Mass relay in Arrival is destroyed through pure force. In this case, it likely causes the energy built up in the mass relay to backfire when its outer structure containing it is destroyed.  The mass relays in ME3 are essentially overloaded to the point of a short circuit. The energy is being directed in such a way as to fulfill the function of the cruicible. Much like the IFF helped you direct the path of the relay in a more precise way.

Basically, all of that star system destroying energy...rather than being backfired onto the star systems...is being channeled to fulfill another purpose.

[SentientSurfer]

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.

It could have just 'fixed' the keepers after the protheans were wiped out. Then Saren wouldn't have been needed in ME1. No one would have 'seen' Guardian either as the Citadel was empty for a loooooong time. 

[CaFe87]

lordnyx1 wrote...

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..

Sure.
But it is still possible for a civilization to be advanced enough to take him out. A civilization born in a solar system without Mass Relay could have developed their own ideas of FTL drives and Relays.

Just saying nothing the reapers do, makes 100% sure there wont be a organic-slaughtering civilization.

[SentientSurfer]

The Mass relay in Arrival is destroyed through pure force. In this case, it likely causes the energy built up in the mass relay to backfire when its outer structure containing it is destroyed.  The mass relays in ME3 are essentially overloaded to the point of a short circuit. The energy is being directed in such a way as to fulfill the function of the cruicible. Much like the IFF helped you direct the path of the relay in a more precise way.

Basically, all of that star system destroying energy...rather than being backfired onto the star systems...is being channeled to fulfill another purpose.

But they created explosions so incomprehensibly huge, they were visible on a galactic map. 

Modifié par SentientSurfer, 27 mars 2012 - 08:04 .

[BrianWilly]

Jonwes wrote...

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.

This is canonically and logically false.

The geth didn't rebel.  The quarians attacked them first.

By that rationale, the Catalyst may as well argue that "organics will always destroy synthetics" on the exact same grounds with the exact same amount of evidence.

If we go by the "his reference point is not as limited as our experience" argument, the Catalyst could say literally anything about any sort of topic and we would be forced to accept it at face value.

"Synthetics will always rebel against organics."
"Organics will always attack synthetics."
"Organics will always attack organics."
"Synthetics will always attack synthetics."
"Synthetics will always cooperate with synthetics."
"Pie will always be delicious."

There's no logic behind it.  Even if an event directly contradicts one of these statements -- such as the geth and quarians learning to coeexist with each other after all -- the Catalyst can just say "Oh well hey maybe they get along now but what about later?  What if it happens in a trillion years?  Then I'll have been right all along!"

It's the sort of reasoning that would get you laughed out of any academic setting in the world.

(note: pie is always delicious)

Modifié par BrianWilly, 27 mars 2012 - 08:06 .

[WizenSlinky0]

The Angry One wrote...

WizenSlinky0 wrote...

He is still the antagonist. He believes the eventuality will still occur. His statement essentially says, "You have rejected my cycle, so now you must choose how to proceed". He is done. He still disagrees with you but he's lost.

The fact remains if the cruicible is not used in the current context of the story then the reapers will just keep reaping. So, he gives you the options that the crucible will allow him to achieve. If anything it is a design flaw in the cruicible and the fact Bioware didn't want us to have any other choices. It has nothing to do with the Catalysts logic. Destroying the reapers is disputing his logic. The rest, for better or worse, is due to design and story choices. Not plotholes.

Destroying the Reapers is an idea it determines as a valid option and therefore follows it's logic.
It comes with the price tag of destroying all synthetic life including the Geth to "buy time". No doubt destroying the relays follows this logic too.

Do you think plot holes are an entity of their own, or a purposeful decision? Plot holes are created by design and story choices. Bad design and story choices.
It indicates that they didn't think this ending through at all.

Either the child lies to you, in which case it is not a plot hole, but a story development meant to be picked up on later...or he told you the truth and those are the only functions the cruicible can be used for. In which case again, not a plot hole. If allowing the child to lie is a plothole then basically anything that remains open to a new game or medium is a "plothole" because information was ommitted.

If that is the acceptable definition people are using for plothole, then fine it's a plothole, and I officially love them to death when done right.  I refer to plotholes as unintentionally fragmented narration or design. But if you really want to say that plotholes can be made intentionally then every argument made against them is pointless. Because being a plothole wouldn't be inherently bad.

We'd be right back to what I originally said. That the ending was unsatisfying and generally unfortunate for the trilogy, or just "sucks" if you wanted to be lean and mean. Because discussing whether or not plotholes exist would become irrelevent.

[VirgoT]

The Angry One wrote...

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.

Okay, I see what you mean by hybrids (organics and machines together). But, by what you said, would they still follow the machine way of thinking? Since the machine parts took over, they would now think like machines, no? So while technically you can call them hybrids, they could be much like Terminators; Machine minds, controlling machine/organic bodies.

My view of a "true" hybrid would be much like most cyborgs in other forms of sci-fi; A human mind controlling machine parts. 

That's what I gathered from Javik when he shared that information.

Modifié par VirgoT, 27 mars 2012 - 08:10 .

[WizenSlinky0]

SentientSurfer wrote...

The Mass relay in Arrival is destroyed through pure force. In this case, it likely causes the energy built up in the mass relay to backfire when its outer structure containing it is destroyed.  The mass relays in ME3 are essentially overloaded to the point of a short circuit. The energy is being directed in such a way as to fulfill the function of the cruicible. Much like the IFF helped you direct the path of the relay in a more precise way.

Basically, all of that star system destroying energy...rather than being backfired onto the star systems...is being channeled to fulfill another purpose.

But they created explosions so incomprehensibly huge, they were visible on a galactic map. 

This is directly considered in the final cut scene where the wave of energy washes over earth in the Destroy ending (only using it as an example as it's the one I picked and I therefore have a more full context of that ending). The blast isn't harmful because it is being "focused" essentially. It's being targeted to do something very specific. Since energy cannot be created...so long as that energy is being used for another purpose...then no damage should be done to the star system.

[BrianWilly]

WizenSlinky0 wrote...

This is directly considered in the final cut scene where the wave of energy washes over earth in the Destroy ending (only using it as an example as it's the one I picked and I therefore have a more full context of that ending). The blast isn't harmful because it is being "focused" essentially. It's being targeted to do something very specific. Since energy cannot be created...so long as that energy is being used for another purpose...then no damage should be done to the star system.

I agree that this is the way it's supposed to work, but the fact that the blast (in all of its colors) damages the Normandy for some reason makes it a bit more dubious.

[Avissel]

WizenSlinky0 wrote...

This is directly considered in the final cut scene where the wave of energy washes over earth in the Destroy ending (only using it as an example as it's the one I picked and I therefore have a more full context of that ending). The blast isn't harmful because it is being "focused" essentially. It's being targeted to do something very specific. Since energy cannot be created...so long as that energy is being used for another purpose...then no damage should be done to the star system.

Unless your EMS is low, in which case  the harmless focused blast incinerates the earth.

[Damien Shepherd]

Reading this thread has confirmed my feelings on that the ending is really quite undefendable, there's a reason why gaming media has sidelined it's viewers with either the "artistic integrity" shtick, or just attacking fans with condescending remarks.

[SentientSurfer]

Either the child lies to you, in which case it is not a plot hole, but a story development meant to be picked up on later...or he told you the truth and those are the only functions the cruicible can be used for. In which case again, not a plot hole. If allowing the child to lie is a plothole then basically anything that remains open to a new game or medium is a "plothole" because information was ommitted.

If that is the acceptable definition people are using for plothole, then fine it's a plothole, and I officially love them to death when done right.  I refer to plotholes as unintentionally fragmented narration or design. But if you really want to say that plotholes can be made intentionally then every argument made against them is pointless. Because being a plothole wouldn't be inherently bad.

We'd be right back to what I originally said. That the ending was unsatisfying and generally unfortunate for the trilogy, or just "sucks" if you wanted to be lean and mean. Because discussing whether or not plotholes exist would become irrelevent.

I agree with your definition of a plot hole. It's not a plot hole. His logic is just. . .lazy. He is the catalyst for the crucible, so he knows how to contruct a device that will wipe out all synthetics. Why not just use said device when synthetics become a danger? His logic is flawed and his solution seems much less than optimal, but it's not a plot hole per se. Just really lazy writing. And an undeveloped starting premise. 

Modifié par SentientSurfer, 27 mars 2012 - 08:16 .

[WizenSlinky0]

BrianWilly wrote...

WizenSlinky0 wrote...

This is directly considered in the final cut scene where the wave of energy washes over earth in the Destroy ending (only using it as an example as it's the one I picked and I therefore have a more full context of that ending). The blast isn't harmful because it is being "focused" essentially. It's being targeted to do something very specific. Since energy cannot be created...so long as that energy is being used for another purpose...then no damage should be done to the star system.

I agree that this is the way it's supposed to work, but the fact that the blast (in all of its colors) damages the Normandy for some reason makes it a bit more dubious.

That whole Normandy scene is...I don't even want to discuss it. There is so much wrong there it makes me want to cry.

Avissel wrote...

WizenSlinky0 wrote...

This
is directly considered in the final cut scene where the wave of energy
washes over earth in the Destroy ending (only using it as an example as
it's the one I picked and I therefore have a more full context of that
ending). The blast isn't harmful because it is being "focused"
essentially. It's being targeted to do something very specific. Since
energy cannot be created...so long as that energy is being used for
another purpose...then no damage should be done to the star system.

Unless your EMS is low, in which case  the harmless focused blast incinerates the earth.

Well then, that kinda goes beyond simple conservation of energy. I mean I could make the argument that low EMS causes a sub-par crucible that is unable to properly focus the energy entirely. But really, I stand corrected. That is likely a plot hole UNLESS similar damage is caused to planets in every single other star system with a relay.

I've never gone in with EMS so I just assumed the extra damage to Earth was caused by the reapers in some way.

[BrianWilly]

Avissel wrote...

Unless your EMS is low, in which case  the harmless focused blast incinerates the earth.

I think the logic behind this is that if your EMS is low, the Crucible isn't really completed in time and therefore doesn't work the way that it should.

[JohnnyG]

Admiral H. Cain wrote...

The Illusive Mans appearance wasn't a plot hole.

As for your second one, all I see are rationalizations for genocide. We can argue that one in circles all day.

So are you going to address any of the actual plot holes?

/Agree

[WizenSlinky0]

BrianWilly wrote...

Avissel wrote...

Unless your EMS is low, in which case  the harmless focused blast incinerates the earth.

I think the logic behind this is that if your EMS is low, the Crucible isn't really completed in time and therefore doesn't work the way that it should.

That was my first conclusion. But without playing a low EMS game I can't confirm if it's a plothole or not. Hackett would have to specifically say the Crucible is not ready but screw it, I'll go if you'll go.

But that leaves some pretty terrible implications for the galaxy way beyond what we've been assuming as just "Earth is more damaged". Perhaps we had a darker ending in the game than we originally believed.

[Saul Iscariot]

@WS What did you think of my ideas concerning a few cut scenes then the Normandy escape making more sense?

[WizenSlinky0]

Saul Iscariot wrote...

@WS What did you think of my ideas concerning a few cut scenes then the Normandy escape making more sense?

To be honest, I didn't catch them as I was caught up in the other conversations in here. I was going to go back and find one to quote but they seem fairly fragmented about. So unless you'd like to put together a cohesive list, or requote one you already made somewhere in this thread, I can't comment in a specific capacity.

However, extra scenes with the normandy escape would close part of the hole there. Especially if it's damaged in some way prior to the relay blast (this could open the possibility of current damages being the reason for what we see, rather than the blast itself).

Though I still have to question why Joker and your squad of all people would abandon you. Unless Hackett specifically says "Shepard is dead". In which case, you'd think SOMEBODY would emotionally decide screw that, I'll go find out for myself. But it'd still close the hole.

Modifié par WizenSlinky0, 27 mars 2012 - 08:27 .