913 réponses à ce sujet

[Solmanian]

Daedalus1773 wrote...

Ingvarr Stormbird wrote...

Our_Last_Scene wrote...

But you would lose.

If you said no to the kid, the galaxy would be doomed, they hit that point over our head again and again.

I think it was this thread where I pointed out the possible numbers of the Reapers? Even at a ridiculous understatement there would still be 20,000 Sovereign class ones.

If you did read proper responses, you'd understand that in fact your claim about Reaper numbers sound ridiculous.
With 20000 cap ships (and assuming we still need about 4 dreads to take cap ship down), remember about 100 dreads in total for all galaxy.
This is 800:1 superiority! Why Reapers would encounter any trouble at all with superiority like that, you don't need Saren, you don't need Conduit or Alpha Relay or whatever. You just arrive and squash them like an ant, in several hours.
Reapers numbers were never confirmed in canon and I think because of that writers didn't tie all loose ends, therefore lore contradicts what we observe in game events.

The Quarian fleet alone has over 50,000 ships. All of them armed.  And the Reapers are very obviously spread out attacking many places around the galaxy simultaneously.  Armed with Thanix Cannons (the same weapons Reaper ships use), there's no reason the Reapers couldn't be beaten conventionally.

With the combined Human, Turian, Asari, Quarian, Geth, Volus & other miscellaneous fleets (over 100,000 ships, plausibly) the battle versus the finite # of Reapers at Earth could be won handily. Especially with surprise on their side, and perhaps whatever realistic MacGuffin ability the writers decide to give to the Crucible (disable Reaper shields, whatever).

At that point the Reapers would probably have to consolidate their forces to stand against a combined galactic fleet that size. At which point the Reapers can no longer be everywhere at once to crush the galaxy's ability to manufacture warships en masse. Time is now working against the Reapers. Reapers can't replace their losses easily, whereas the galaxy is a very (very) big place, and everyone is now making ships with Thanix cannons to deal with Reapers.

You keep thinking of thanix cannons as a trump card, that allows frigate to destroy reaper capital ships. Yes they are better than what they had before, but the protheans had better weapons (the particle cannons). And unless you think the galaxy can make hundreds of cruisers in hours, there's nothing to prevent the reapers from stomping your forces at earth and go about their bussiness. And the thanix cannon definitely doesn't stop the reaper ships from oneshoting your ships, especialy since codex says they have twice the range. Don't forget thanix also needs lodicrus amount of ez0 (they had to salvage soveriegn core to build them), and ez0 mininig/refining (or whatever they it's produced) operation or probably aren't at full swing... And using a gun that uses superheated alloys as ammunition, will generate tremendous amount of heat; thus reducing the battle endurance of every ship that uses it (which is determined by how much heat the ship produces, and how long it will take it to melt your system and cook your crew).

[Solmanian]

Ingvarr Stormbird wrote...

Say, you have 2000 soldiers. Each one is 4 times powerful than one enemy soldier.
The enemy has only 10 soldiers.

Which way you will lose less?
a) attacking with all of your 2000 soldiers
attacking with 10 of your soldiers and letting the rest hide?

edit: altered a bit to make it less granular

If you're from a species where only one person is born every year,than any loss is unacceptable. It's much easier to use other means than direct attack (airstrike, starving them out, psychological warfare)

[Ieldra]

@OP:
No conventional victory. That would cheapen the Reapers as enemies.

[Solmanian]

Daedalus1773 wrote...

Where is it canon that there have been 20,000 cycles? Curious if I missed a Codex somewhere.

1 billion advanced spacefaring species per cycle is a ridiculous number.

He means 1 bilion individuals.

the oldest recorded reaper encountered is the leviathan of Dis (look it up), which was dated to be a billion years old. We have no reson to even assume he was the oldest reaper ever created, but it gives us a timeframe.

[Jeb231]

Thing is it is a retcon which completely goes against the intention behind the endings.

consider this:

Starchild says the truth... No 4rth option is needed.
Starchild lies...Red ending is the way out.


The catalyst isn't the crucible. The catalyst only explains the functionality of the crucible. These aren't his choices. He presents the choices. Original draft had Javik as the catalyst...I don't think it's impossible for them to replace the starchild dialog and keep their artistic vision (since he wasn't there in the first place).



People refuse the current endings because they refute the catalyst's logic and adding a fourth ending therefore  goes against the original points made by the ending. It doesn't fix the ending, simply hide it under more junk. If people can't accept the ending choices because of the catalyst then the catalyst itself should be fixed.

if the original intent was for the crucible to be a Reaper trap there would already be a fourth option.

It would also make the plot behind ME3 (getting the crucible to work) redundant and pointless. Once again, the writer wouldn't need to write a magic beam to defeat the reapers if they considered we had a chance to win conventionally.

All of this is fanfic and it betrays the original intention behind the ending and worse the issue with the ending (the catalyst) remains.

If they need to retcon something, then they may as well get rid of starchild completely, or replace the 3d model or add more line to explain his rhetoric.

Modifié par Jeb231, 12 avril 2012 - 11:15 .

[a.m.p]

Vigil_N7 wrote...

What, then, would be the point in picking control/destroy/synthesis if you can beat them conventionally?

It cheapens the idea of the actual choices we make if we can just beat them anyway

The price of that choice. You can pick an option and stop it here and now. Or you can refuse and keep fighting for months/years, lose billions. But keep the relay network and the chance to rebuild.

[phantomdasilva]

I strongly support the refusal option and I love this alternate ending http://arkis.deviant...ILERS-289902125

I believe it's will be dramatic story telling to make it so it's possible that the reapers do lose in the refuse option. Isn't one of the themes of the game of the idea of unity and building alliance. Wouldn't the refuse option of testing your ability to build alliance by taking on the reapers conventially and winning?

I'll add, there's nothing stopping the catalyst from leave shepard bleeding to death. If the catalyst never appeared as starchild to the catalyst. If you took too long to make a decision the crucible is destroyed and apparently the "reapers win" .

So if the reapers wins by doing nothing. why didn't the starchild do nothing and let shepard bleed to death?

Maybe because doing nothing wouldn't result in reaper winning, maybe because the reapers fear the fleet could win or at the very least (in low EMs) will take out a lot of reaper ship in the process and this was their attempt to do a deal with Shepard to compromise and get their own victory out of it (such as wiping all synthetic life or finishing their goal in merging syntehtic life or setting up a reaper trap in getting Shepard to "control" the reapers'. ).

the present of the refusal ending actually removes a plot hole from the game

For those that say, it has been said many times we can't beat the reapers conventionally.

That is true. however that's a simple fix. If your EMS is like 5000+ have Hackett say before the priority earth mission being amazed by the size of the fleet and thinking maybe there is hope we can stop the reapers if the crucible doesn't work.

For people that say it weakens the Reapers as an enemy. the thing is, most of Reaper tactics are based on divide and conquer. blindsiding your targets through the Citadel, By coercing people into a trap with the relays, picking off the opponents independently and indoctrinating leaders to divide the nation. Reaper tactics has always been about subterfuge and divide and conquer. That has been the tactic, wouldn't it make sense from a narrative perspective that the reapers can be conquered by a united galaxy

this maurauder shields comic pretty much summarise it here http://koobismo.devi...llery/#/d4u9uny
Why go through all the effort to indoctrinate leaders and all the hidden subterfugewhen they are so sure they have won through strength of numbers. Maybe they do it because their strength of numbers aren't so invincible against a united galaxy

Javik mention that in his cycle the galaxy didn't unite to stop the reapers in a final combat.

Modifié par phantomdasilva, 12 avril 2012 - 11:38 .

[Solmanian]

daecath wrote...

Ok, I am an ardent supporter that starbrat is just stupid, and should be removed.

However, if BioWare is going to be so committed to him that they refuse to see all the literary rules they're breaking just to keep him, I suppose that a compromise is better than nothing (which the extended DLC right now is nothing).

So, here is what I would need, bare minimum, to be satisfied. First, some other option or options that allow you to go tell this kid to go... away (to put it mildly). Second, change the kid. I don't know why it appears in the form of a child that Shepard is now probably the only person alive who's seen him. Make him an alien, make him a Shepard clone, make him Avina, something that makes more sense than a dead kid that no one else alive in the universe has seen. Third, there has to be a chance for a happy ending, and a bad ending. I want blue babies!

Fourth, sweeten the pot. I've suggested elsewhere, but here are a couple easy to add things that would make it a little easier to take:
Emily Wong's death recorded in game. You get to see her last broadcast, maybe even see her take down a reaper. Or listen to a first hand account from a survivor on Earth that saw her do it.
Kal'Reegar's death recorded. Again, a great character that everyone seemed to like, who got shafted in the way his death was handled. A recording, something. Doesn't have to be too long. Maybe a nice scene with Tali as you both listen to his final recorded message.
Tali's face. We've been waiting for 5 years to see this. The quarians are described as even more beautiful than asari. And the best you can come up with is a poorly photoshopped stock photo? At the very least, take the voice actress for Tali and come up with something from her.
Retake armor & weapons - Major Kirahee has a special gift for you.
Alter Marauder Shields to make him stand out a bit more. Maybe even pull a Morinth, and use the fan's creation that it is really Nihlis.

Those would be simple things, but really nice gestures to add in. I think if they did all of these, and offered the ending compromise, I would be satisfied. It wouldn't go down in history as my favorite game ever, which is what I was hoping for, but it would at least be a game that I could play multiple times.

"I suppose that a compromise is better than nothing (which the extended DLC right now is nothing)."

You need to look up compromise in the dictionary.

Yeah, I tottaly support starchild being changed to shepard or avina, and suggested it myself several times. The kid presence is just confusing: If he suppose to represent the people can't save in sheps dream, than what is it being the catalyst suppose to represent? Their maybe some deeper layer that just completely went over our head... But I understand that he is part of their artistic vision, and shouldn't change it for popular demand if they don't feel like it. Think how utterly horrendous suggestions you read on the forums (I remember one asking to make it an FPS and cut down on the dialogues) , and see why they don't give posters in the BSN veto rights.

There's absolutely a chance for blue babies, but not in this game. First they need to have a firm grasp of the plot of ME4. Than they can make it cannon saying that even if you didn't romance liara, she still mindraped you in ME1 and decided to have your baby after you died; if that what the fans realy want.

And you're basically asking for more cinemtics and equipment DLC...

[ReXspec]

a.m.p wrote...

CapnManx wrote...

Even if it would work, they can't take the time to do that; their populations are being harvested, it's not just about blowing up Reapers, it has to be done while there is still something to save.  That means keeping them from spreading to other worlds (preventing invasions was something they had absolutely no luck with, even before their fleets got thrashed). 

Since Reapers just make troops as they go, they suffer no personell shortages; every single world they attack gets swarmed with Reaper forces and would take a full scale ground war to reclaim.  Every world lost means fewer resources to work with, fewer populations to draw upon, and fewer places to seek refuge.  Think what they needed to go through in preparation for the recapture of Earth, and that was before the Citadel was taken there and the Reaper presence was reinforced.  They wouldn't even attempt it without the Cruicible.

Anyway, it was Admiral Hackett who claimed that they couldn't defeat the Reapers conventionally; I'd take the assessment of an in-universe veteran fleet commander as an 'expert opinion'.

It is admittedly a problem of the whole main plot line revolving around the crucible. Let's say this. Whether the reapers could or could not be defeated conventionally was up to Bioware. They decided to make the crucible plot and thus told us that no, no conventional fighting. It was an arbitrary decision, regardless of everything previously established. When I was talking to Hackett, I felt it was awfully forced and more like Bioware through Hackett beating me over the head with the idea that I have to go build the crucible and nothing else would work.

Reintroducing the idea of beating them conventionally at the last moment, after everyone has been obsessing over the crucible for the whole game would cause certain disconnect, but I really think it could solve more problems then it causes.

You both forget that TIM actually gives us a canon option of disrupting the Reaper forces.  Remember the mission involving Miranda's father?  His work was so much of a threat, the Reapers themselves invaded the Sanctuary facility to stop his work.

Yes--Hackett was right that Reapers cannot be defeated conventionally, but using the means of defeating the Reapers that are already provided by canon makes the war unconventional.  In addition to the fact that arguably no other cycle has amassed the combined might of the entire galaxy.

[Solmanian]

Ingvarr Stormbird wrote...

Our_Last_Scene wrote...
You have to remember that from what we know of every other cylce, the relays were turned off and the governments were destroyed.

... and it still took them several centuries to finish the cycle.
Keep digging.

The reapers weren't in any hurry. They allready won, so they could take their time with each planet they occupy, and be thorough. Time was on their side.

[a.m.p]

Jeb231 wrote...

Thing is it is a retcon which completely goes against the intention behind the endings.

consider this:

Starchild says the truth... No 4rth option is needed.
Starchild lies...Red ending is the way out.


The catalyst isn't the crucible. The catalyst only explains the functionality of the crucible. These aren't his choices. He presents the choices. Original draft had Javik as the catalyst...I don't think it's impossible for them to replace the starchild dialog and keep their artistic vision (since he wasn't there in the first place).



People refuse the current endings because they refute the catalyst's logic and adding a fourth ending therefore  goes against the original points made by the ending. It doesn't fix the ending, simply hide it under more junk. If people can't accept the ending choices because of the catalyst then the catalyst itself should be fixed.

if the original intent was for the crucible to be a Reaper trap there would already be a fourth option.

It would also make the plot behind ME3 (getting the crucible to work) redundant and pointless. Once again, the writer wouldn't need to write a magic beam to defeat the reapers if they considered we had a chance to win conventionally.

All of this is fanfic and it betrays the original intention behind the ending and worse the issue with the ending (the catalyst) remains.

If they need to retcon something, then they may as well get rid of starchild completely, or replace the 3d model or add more line to explain his rhetoric.

I would be totally happy if they got rid of starchild. As represented my [Mandatory statement that removing the starchild would be the best fix for the ending] in the OP.

As for the intention behind the endings, they are such a mess I am still not sure what that intention was.
What exactly is the message here?

If it is like the rest of the game, the strength of unity through diversity, how does a conventional victory go against it?

If it is:

KustomDeluxe wrote...
Because everyone knows the only way to solve the universe's problems is by having a god descend from on high
and wave its hand in order to solve them.

then, what's with the sudden theme twist?

Modifié par a.m.p, 12 avril 2012 - 01:33 .

[Solmanian]

Elyiia wrote...

You can't claim 20,000 capital ships seeing as we're told in the game that cycles do not necessarily have species that can be used to create a capital ship. We're told that they couldn't make a capital ship from the Prothean cycle. It obviously requires some special condition that isn't apparent in every cycle.

You'll have to give me a real link, to this prothean couldn't be harvested, cause people keep throwing it around.

Javik's species perhaps couldn't be addapted, but all sentinet species? Unlikely. Reaper industrey is based on "living of the land" so to speak. Being unable to use a large precentage of galactic species as "goo" for shipbuilding, would be a counterproductive inefficency. And contramend the whole point of preserving sentient civilizations in reaper form. They think they're saving them by preserving them, if they just kill them and wipe them from existence it would be doing a very poor job...

[a.m.p]

phantomdasilva wrote...

I strongly support the refusal option and I love this alternate ending http://arkis.deviant...ILERS-289902125

Thank you. I already have that in my list but I couldn't find the original link, so went with a BSN thread. Going to add it now,

Edit:

phantomdasilva wrote...
So if the reapers wins by doing nothing. why didn't the starchild do nothing and let shepard bleed to death?

The closest to an answer to that I got is that the crucible reprogrammed the starchild to seek input from the nearest organic. Somebody should seriously make a list of everything the crucible apparently is designed to do. Without any of the designers understanding what they were designing. Right.

Modifié par a.m.p, 12 avril 2012 - 11:55 .

[a.m.p]

Ieldra2 wrote...

@OP:
No conventional victory. That would cheapen the Reapers as enemies.

Doesn't the fact that they are some weird starchild's playthings already cheapen them?

[Elyiia]

Solmanian wrote...

Elyiia wrote...

You can't claim 20,000 capital ships seeing as we're told in the game that cycles do not necessarily have species that can be used to create a capital ship. We're told that they couldn't make a capital ship from the Prothean cycle. It obviously requires some special condition that isn't apparent in every cycle.

You'll have to give me a real link, to this prothean couldn't be harvested, cause people keep throwing it around.

Javik's species perhaps couldn't be addapted, but all sentinet species? Unlikely. Reaper industrey is based on "living of the land" so to speak. Being unable to use a large precentage of galactic species as "goo" for shipbuilding, would be a counterproductive inefficency. And contramend the whole point of preserving sentient civilizations in reaper form. They think they're saving them by preserving them, if they just kill them and wipe them from existence it would be doing a very poor job...

While all evidence points to the Protheans being completely wiped out by
the Reapers, this was not the case. The Reapers are believed to have
attempted harnessing the genetic material from millions of Protheans to
create a new Reaper. It is speculated by EDI
that this attempt failed and so the Reapers decided to repurpose this
substantial number of captive Protheans to suit the needs of the
Reapers.

If they can't turn them into a Reaper they seem to rewrite them so they still exist.
masseffect.wikia.com/wiki/Prothean

Modifié par Elyiia, 12 avril 2012 - 11:52 .

[Solmanian]

Ingvarr Stormbird wrote...

Our_Last_Scene wrote...

And what? I can't use math to claim any number of Reapers? 

Well, you can, but as long as your math will be based on speculation, it will be speculation itself.
- It was never proven the Leviathan was "proper" reaper that already took part in the standard cycle. All we know it had indoctrination tech. This weakens the whole premise of "how many billions years ago cycles started"
- It was never proven that cycles run by the clock, 50000 years each. This also weakens the whole premise of how many cycles were in total
- We have no idea what is the ratio of successful cap ship production to their losses. This throws the whole oversimplistic formula out the window

http://masseffect.wi...eviathan_of_Dis. It was a reaper. Just like most people thought since ME1.

It's 50k by average. For your convenience: http://math.about.co...age-Defined.htm . N in our case is the number of cycles. If you change N, than 50k isn't the average, is it now...

According to "word of god" (the writers), the reapers usually usually didn't suffer considerable casualties in the previous cycles. If they suffered more casualties than they were able to build, they would've been beaten by now...

[Jeb231]

That's the thing. I'm totally unsure what they meant with this but if the renegade ending was indeed the only good ending FMVs should have reflected this. As it stands it simply looks like the traditional renegade choice (racist and egomaniac rebel who cares more about his self preservation than a bunch of peasants).

The real question is, was the ending intended to be taken as face value (as the discussions with the writer seem to indicate) in which case the catalyst simply fails to do the job it is supposed to do properly (which is to enunciate the ending choices), or did they make it so the real ending was the renegade choice. Until we know this we cannot help fixing the ending in a relevant way.

It's not that I'm against the idea...I think it would have been a great twist for the crucible to be a reaper trap.I just don't think it was intended (nor it was hinted at by the ending FMVs) and the very few people who actually enjoy the ending would simply feel annoyed by this retcon and this is why I think Bioware won't do this.

I could totally be wrong obviously...I see at least two or three way to possibly interpret the endings which are radically different.I'm still unsure what story they were trying to tell myself. Sometimes the simpler explanation is the best.Which is, after they cut Javik from release they had to find a new catalyst. Problem is that Javik was a person you trusted, and the new catalyst is a reaper, and this is why the updated ending fails on so many levels.

Modifié par Jeb231, 12 avril 2012 - 12:41 .

[a.m.p]

Jeb231 wrote...

I could totally be wrong obviously...I see at least two or three way to possibly interpret the endings which are radically different.I'm still unsure what story they were trying to tell myself. Sometimes the simpler explanation is the best.Which is, after they cut Javik from release they had to find a new catalyst. Problem is that Javik was a person you trusted, and the new catalyst is a reaper, and this is why the updated ending fails on so many levels.

Could you give a link to that Javik being the catalyst thing? I've heard it a few times but never found where it came from.

I love Javik way too much to wish him participating in a convoluted ending, stuffed with unnecessary symbolism. But that could have fixed the problem of Shepard's sudden belief in everything they're told.

I made a comment a few pages back on this thread how every major decision throughout the series (except for maybe the collector base) is explained and presented by people we know and either trust, or understand their goals enough to predict the outcome. Some leaps of faith are there too, me1 rachni decision for example, but if one is unsure about her, one can always kill her right there.

And the ending totally breaks this.

[the slynx]

Sure is speculative in here.

To those of you arguing the Reapers are far too numerous to defeat conventionally, are you okay with the Reapers being beatable, albeit with great losses incurred, after being weakened by Crucible/Catalyst/Whatever-it-is, followed by conventional warfare?

[Clayless]

a.m.p wrote...

Jeb231 wrote...

I could totally be wrong obviously...I see at least two or three way to possibly interpret the endings which are radically different.I'm still unsure what story they were trying to tell myself. Sometimes the simpler explanation is the best.Which is, after they cut Javik from release they had to find a new catalyst. Problem is that Javik was a person you trusted, and the new catalyst is a reaper, and this is why the updated ending fails on so many levels.

Could you give a link to that Javik being the catalyst thing? I've heard it a few times but never found where it came from.

I love Javik way too much to wish him participating in a convoluted ending, stuffed with unnecessary symbolism. But that could have fixed the problem of Shepard's sudden belief in everything they're told.

He wasn't, Shepard's supposed to think he's the Catalyst when he finds him on Eden Prime.

The Catalyst, named the Guardian in the leaks, is still there.

[a.m.p]

Our_Last_Scene wrote...

a.m.p wrote...

Jeb231 wrote...

I could totally be wrong obviously...I see at least two or three way to possibly interpret the endings which are radically different.I'm still unsure what story they were trying to tell myself. Sometimes the simpler explanation is the best.Which is, after they cut Javik from release they had to find a new catalyst. Problem is that Javik was a person you trusted, and the new catalyst is a reaper, and this is why the updated ending fails on so many levels.

Could you give a link to that Javik being the catalyst thing? I've heard it a few times but never found where it came from.

I love Javik way too much to wish him participating in a convoluted ending, stuffed with unnecessary symbolism. But that could have fixed the problem of Shepard's sudden belief in everything they're told.

He wasn't, Shepard's supposed to think he's the Catalyst when he finds him on Eden Prime.

The Catalyst, named the Guardian in the leaks, is still there.

This is sad.
Am I correct that there are several versions of the leaked script? If so how old is this one?

[Jeb231]

torudoom wrote...

Sure is speculative in here.

To those of you arguing the Reapers are far too numerous to defeat conventionally, are you okay with the Reapers being beatable, albeit with great losses incurred, after being weakened by Crucible/Catalyst/Whatever-it-is, followed by conventional warfare?

At this point my will has been crushed and I'm willing to accept anything as long as it makes a little bit of sense. I just don't think it can without altering quite a bit the starkid scene.

[the slynx]

Jeb231 wrote...

At this point my will has been crushed and I'm willing to accept anything as long as it makes a little bit of sense. I just don't think it can without altering quite a bit the starkid scene.

That's the spirit.

[phantomdasilva]

If it's impossible to beat the reapers conventionally and the only way to stop the reapers is to have the being controlling the reapers to say. Ok, we let you win, just go ahead and destroy it.

Then, the reapers is a badly written and overpowered willain because there will be no way possible to make it satisfying to stop the reapers.

Sure the refusal ending "weakens" the reapers but the standards you want the reaper to have is too high and not conducive to a satisfying resolution of the series.

If we look at the reaper tactics of divide and conquer by indoctrinating key leaders, and inciting conflict and civil war (like with the cerberus vs aliance split).You can say,

a) the reapers are unstoppable against a united galaxy fleet and nothing can conventially destroy them and they are just causing civil war, dividing the nations and picking them off one at a time just to make it a tiny little bit easier to destroy us.

or

they are indoctrinating and causing civil wars and dividing nations and picking them off one at a time because they know that a united galaxy is the only way to defeat them

Both interpretations are logical but which one makes more sense from a narrative perspective?
Wouldn't it make sense that the only way to defeat the reapers is to overcome their primary tactic throughout the entire series and be able to stop them from dividing and conquer and unite the galaxy? Why not make that a core component of the ending?

Modifié par phantomdasilva, 12 avril 2012 - 04:02 .

[iiTzCyAniiDe]

With high enough EMS i can see this being a good option.