913 réponses à ce sujet

[mad_yojik]

Well to add my two pennies...

First of all I can't say I hate the ending as it is, IMO they are acceptable, not a masterpiece, full of plotholes in last 10 minutes, but not as awful as most people here describe. "Just enough" of a conclusion for me.
Now to the idea: Its great as outline, and (arguably) won't ruin immersion in game world (for ppl like me at least, who take edings as they are) like "indoctrination|intoxication|some other theory".

Now to the specifics - I think both sabotaging the guardian, and talking it down should not be made option, since he has already "given" Shepard his "peace demands (in form of RGB solution)", and AI (or some other sort of Reaper) wont change it. Also I think "total conventional victory" should also not be given (at least immedately), since we are being told for whole game "we cant win conventionaly", so the best outcome will be "galaxy is at war, but "citadel alliance" SLOWLY winning, and in several hundred years....", and Shep either goes to continue fight ("continue game") or retires with his chosen LI. I also think player should really-really work to achieve this, for example with EMS 7k+. If EMS is 6-7k - galaxy locked in state of war, no one wins (stalemate), but alliance wins "the battle of Earth" (Normandy, Shepard and squad live). If assets are 5-6k - galaxy locked in state of war, no one wins (stalemate), but alliance loses "the battle of Earth" (Normandy, Shepard and squad dies). Less then 5k - "you lose", reapers blow fleet and Normandy into the oblivion, and Shepard is harvested or turned into husk

[a.m.p]

@mad_yojik
Thanks for the two pennies. I am extremely happy that there are people who think both the existing endings and this addition acceptable. Shows that the compromise might actually work.

What you outline is pretty much my idea. Nobody really suggests an instant easy win, we're fully aware any fourth ending must be balanced in terms of consequences with the existing three, so yes, a difficult to get ending with the galaxy having to endure a lot more war, many more casualties, and always a lingering uncertainty that there are more reapers out there.

[mad_yojik]

Well the compromise within fanbase is clearly possibe (and your idea is what I see as one of the best choices for it), certanly their will be small portion of unhappy people (ones who cry "don't touch the endings EVER", ones who want "all sunshine and bunnies" ending), but I can bet most of the fans will be satisfied... The problem is "if Bioware/EA is looking for compromise as well", and I'm not sure this answer is "yes". In fact - I'd bet its quite opposite. Let me explain...

The endings as they are now share obvious similarities (destruction of mass relays, death (exept one option) of Shepard, crash of Normandy somewhere). Even more, all 3 endings make 2 crucial choices of ME3 which inevitably affect the universe (geth/quarian and genophage questions) largely irrelevant (since relays are destroyed - who cares about Tuchanka and Rannoch). The endings remove all "variables" (all the player did during 3 previous games) from future play. It looks like its a "background" for a next title, or even possible MMO. (The only other explanation i can see is that's someone said "lets do just big bang at the end! BOO!", which, given the quality of the rest of game - is very hard to believe ) I doublt the fourth choice will fall in line whith what they intend to. Though I think your idea is as close to perfect solution to the "ME3 ending holywar" problem as possible....

Certanly, all above is just theory, no hard evidence I know of exists to support it, but its quite obvious IMO... And if groundwork on this new title already began - its quite explains the position devs taken, so they listen to the fans to the max they deem possible...

P.S. Why improvise FTL torps when we got antimatter avalible (as a military starship fuel in codex). I bet a 100 grams of antimatter going boom at ten kilometer range is enough to melt a sovereign (since no kinetic barrier deflects radiation). Oh, there wouldn be need for Shepard and crucible though

Modifié par mad_yojik, 21 avril 2012 - 09:14 .

[Lopez23]

and another thing to go with the retcons Carries previous games said it was a purely human inovation and that we only fielded them as well as it being a way to get around the treaty of Farixan which alowed a certain number of dreadnoughts per race because carries were dreadnought sized Ships

[the slynx]

mad_yojik wrote...

.. The problem is "if Bioware/EA is looking for compromise as well", and I'm not sure this answer is "yes". In fact - I'd bet its quite opposite. Let me explain...
The endings remove all "variables" (all the player did during 3 previous games) from future play. It looks like its a "background" for a next title, or even possible MMO...

Some of the alternate endings have been trying specifically to allow them to fit in as though they were similar to a destruction or control ending, in terms of the shape of the galaxy a few years down the road. I don't know if that's quite as clear with the conventional military endings, but it's definitely been a focus on the ending I suggested on in others linked on the first page. Whether or not we did so successfullly is up for debate.

That said, I'm not quite as convinced this is the case, or that future ME games will occur after the Reaper wars. Even with some similarities, the huge differences between, say, whether or not people are now machine-animal hybrids are pretty extreme. I suspect that if there are future ME games, they'll occur earlier in this cycle, maybe following teams works in conjunction with Shepard's efforts. (Or perhaps in an earlier cycle altogether, giving them a sort of tragic, inevitable doom ending like in Halo Reach.)

Regardless, this is all wild speculation. It's possible BioWare isn`t planning on making any other ME games. It`s even more likely that no ending choice will be added at all, and this is all just going to end up forgotten, or as a few isolated instances of head canon. Who knows.

[Elyiia]

torudoom wrote...

a.m.p wrote...

Anyway, I digress. I'd argue against the class-specific ways to disable starchild. Soldier or engineer, torudoom rightfully points out that Shepard is not technologically inept and I really doubt technical specialization would give any advantage in hacking an ancient AI interface. And then there's the matter of what we're trying to do - which is cause damage. So I'd argue that it should be both - fiddling with the interface and shooting hardware, with a bonus for biotic Shepards to rip stuff out with biotics. Because as far as I know biotic Shepards never get to show off their biotics in cutscenes and they definitely deserve that.

That's why I like the suggestion. One of the complaints people have had here is that the endings didn't seem to reflect their choices enough. Giving an ending sabotage choice that involves their class abilities is at least a step in the right direction. I tend to think a straight computer sabotage would work fine, but endings sometimes need that extra snazz.


Edit: Also, wait, are you sure just stomping on delicate technology doesn't fix it?

This reminds me of when you tell Vega to shut down the Geth turrets, and he just stomps on it till it stops working. It's pretty funny but I can't find the video.

[the slynx]

Elyiia wrote...

This reminds me of when you tell Vega to shut down the Geth turrets, and he just stomps on it till it stops working. It's pretty funny but I can't find the video.

Linked in the post a.m.p. made. That was the first I saw of it. Funny stuff.

a.m.p wrote...

All right then how about this:
Soldier: hack, then shoot, then shoot some more until something explodes
Engineer/Infiltrator: hack, then hack some more and overload something, shoot
Vanguard/Adept: hack, shoot, tear out stuff with biotics
Sentinel: hack, then hack more and overload, then tear out stuff with biotics

(Disclaimer: don't want my soldier Shepard to mindlessly shoot stuff without first trying to understand what's what)

@ragnorok87
That was a friendly bump, right?

Very possible. I think as long as it makes sense, and it gives the impression that what you are doing is geared towards your character, it works. That suggestion certainly seems to fit the bill.

[SpartanCommander]

Well I didn't think it would be easy to beat them. Unless we know their soft spots.

We discovered their major one on the Quarrian and Geth homeworld. From what I can tell even though the fleet was shooting at it the last hit took 4 direct cannon hits before it started to die. So I would say it doesn't take an entire fleet to kill one you just need to hit it's main cannon when it's charging it likely due to that it has to lower it's barriers to fire it leaving it vulnerable and once hit the charge is dispersed at the Reaper as well as the shot's hit. This would leave me to believe that a conventional victory is possible but likely extremely hard.

So you can kill them you just need timing. Now for a mission that will show any other weak points in Reaper armor and barriers and it would make the war seem even more hopeful.

[SpartanCommander]

I want the no option it's very in character.

[a.m.p]

mad_yojik wrote...

The endings as they are now share obvious similarities (destruction of mass relays, death (exept one option) of Shepard, crash of Normandy somewhere). Even more, all 3 endings make 2 crucial choices of ME3 which inevitably affect the universe (geth/quarian and genophage questions) largely irrelevant (since relays are destroyed - who cares about Tuchanka and Rannoch). The endings remove all "variables" (all the player did during 3 previous games) from future play. It looks like its a "background" for a next title, or even possible MMO. (The only other explanation i can see is that's someone said "lets do just big bang at the end! BOO!", which, given the quality of the rest of game - is very hard to believe ) I doublt the fourth choice will fall in line whith what they intend to. Though I think your idea is as close to perfect solution to the "ME3 ending holywar" problem as possible....

Certanly, all above is just theory, no hard evidence I know of exists to support it, but its quite obvious IMO... And if groundwork on this new title already began - its quite explains the position devs taken, so they listen to the fans to the max they deem possible...

I get a feeling that Bioware was as confused with the fan reaction as the fans were with Bioware's ending (which in turn confuses me even more). It all really depends on what they mean to do next with the franchise. I did my best to outline how that ending could be functionally similar to control a few hundred years down the line.

Also, a month of shouting on the forums and other activities seems to have saved the universe from a 10000 year dark age. Maybe another month could save Shepard from being turned into Bioshock's Jack. There haven't really been any definitive responses, just some highly confusing twitter PR, so maybe they are still gathering feedback and deciding how much to change.

P.S. Why improvise FTL torps when we got antimatter avalible (as a military starship fuel in codex). I bet a 100 grams of antimatter going boom at ten kilometer range is enough to melt a sovereign (since no kinetic barrier deflects radiation). Oh, there wouldn be need for Shepard and crucible though

I didn't look that much into antimatter weapons due to lack of time, but I'm sure it could be made into yet another reaper-fighting solution. That again, was carefully avoided in favor of the crucible plot.

I went with FTL ramming because the codex says "if we could do that it would kill them, but we can't remove the safeguards". I did my best to show we can.


@SpartanCommander
Well, there is that fact that they only have beams that shoot forward and to make fast turns they have to lower their mass and weaken their shields. And then there's the fact that ME3 made them exceptionally dumb (more on that in a few minutes).

Modifié par a.m.p, 22 avril 2012 - 08:51 .

[a.m.p]

Yet another discovery (probably was discussed elsewhere but I missed it, so I'm putting this here to refer to whenever the issue comes up).
About the citadel, controlling the relay network and disabling it. And the reapers’ superiority and adaptability.

While the allied fleets attack Cronos station, the reapers finally take the citadel. Then they, presumably through the relay network, move it to Earth. Then we are supposed to follow them there and the galaxy map shows us this:

Two possible interpretations:

1)    They disabled all the relays except the route to Sol via Exodus. Which they would only do if they wanted the crucible be brought to Earth, which means we really, really need Admiral Ackbar to clarify this situation.

2)    They didn’t disable the relay network and the map simply does not let us fly around the galaxy and do more sidequests.

Let’s look at that last possibility. It is sort of implied (more like glossed over) that the relay control mechanism was sabotaged after ME1. A question arises. Why couldn’t they fix their own tech? Are they that dumb? The most reasonable answer so far is that to do that they would have to get inside the citadel which was closed when they took it.

So, I, again, decided to replay that part and check this. Here is what I saw. No screenshot here, this needs to be seen in motion. Also, the bik file containing this is called Cat004_Cit_Close.bik.

No. It wasn’t always closed. It was at some point opened, then it was closed again, then the conduit was turned on. When the fleets were going to Sol the reapers were in full control of the citadel. The Charon relay was open. Why?

1)    Back to Admiral Ackbar
2)    They are dumb and cannot fix their own tech.
3)    Fixing this takes time, they didn’t have time to fix it. Still dumb but a little less so. Brings up the question of why didn’t they start with taking the citadel and then working on fixing the sabotage without a huge fleet attacking them. So it’s actually even dumber, just in a different way.

So. What’s this again about reapers being incredibly smart and able to adapt to any new conditions presented to them which means no strategy we could come up with could defeat them? If they are that dumb and stagnant, where's my option to use that against them and beat them conventionally?
Unless it’s option 1, and in this case, where is my option to not trigger the trap set for me and do my best to beat them conventionally?

Modifié par a.m.p, 22 avril 2012 - 09:15 .

[mad_yojik]

@a.m.p

Well, if "ultimate evil with overwelming power" started acting like they have brains - a whole lot of games/books/movies would not happen. Starting with Lord of the rings, Star Wars , and ending on Mass effect series (who said the Sovereign form ME1 was smart? It was stupid, posessing Saren knowing his shields fail if he gets killed).

In fact there may at least two reasons, exept stupidity, on why the Reapers didnt go "citadel first"

1) Its a trap. really. If the reapers are unaware of crucible and its abilites (lets count it a superweapon) - they may be sure that they are able to decimate allied fleet. Why not. So - dropping on top of 'em is just making their job easier. If we think crucible can kill all reapers - might as well go for it ('tis like blowing Death Star is SW6, huge risk for huge win).

2)Overconfidence - initially the Reapers thought that alliance is no (or little of) threat, so they ignored the citadel and proceeded to their harvest. Now when the extent of threat is clear - its too late to repair it.

P.S. I'm not saying conventional victory is impossible, in fact - there is a whole lot unknowns. First of all is the reapers numerical strength and composition, as if the sovereign-class reapers are "thousand in numbers" (as Garrus once  says in Normandy) - then really - there is no option to conventional victory, too great difference in fleet strengths. If on the other hand the number of the reaper dread forces is less then 30 - its pretty possible to smash em using straight-forward dread fire. The number which can be brought down with special "anti-reaper" weapons is somewhere in between...

Modifié par mad_yojik, 22 avril 2012 - 03:20 .

[mad_yojik]

@torudoom

The problem is in fact that I feel that devs needed relays destroyed, and the most complaining people need them intact (even in your proposal they are intact) . In fact only thing that "falls out of line" is "synthesis ending", since control/destroy endings can easy be brought to same conclusion, since there is no geth/krogan anyway (locked by relay destruction), and no reapers (they are either all dead or departed), no Citadel (departed w/reapers/blown up/locked up by relay destruction). BTW if "synthesis fails on long-term" (for example the offspring of synthesized  are normal) - it also comes to the same.

Though - in "total war" ending there is still possibility to have the same conclusion (for example as the last of the reapers are brought down - they send "self destruct all relays" signal)... Though people won't like that :innocent:

Modifié par mad_yojik, 22 avril 2012 - 03:37 .

[a.m.p]

mad_yojik wrote...

@a.m.p

Well, if "ultimate evil with overwelming power" started acting like they have brains - a whole lot of games/books/movies would not happen. Starting with Lord of the rings, Star Wars , and ending on Mass effect series (who said the Sovereign form ME1 was smart? It was stupid, posessing Saren knowing his shields fail if he gets killed).

Well, what choice did Sovereign have? I killed all his geth inside the hall and was about to ruin his plan, I had to be removed with any means necessary. Why Saren's death dropped his shields is a different question and lies more in the area of videogame cliche than antagonist stupidity. Again, it could have been explained that the fleet shooting him actually dropped his shields and not Shepard, which would make significantly more sense and make individual reapers less ridiculously invincible, which would allow for a comprehensive conventional victory plot without crucible-type ***-pulls.

Mass Effect had everything it needed to become that rare story where the antagonist isn't dumb as a brick.

But we instead have this:

1) It's a trap. When I say it's a trap, I mean the crucible being a trap and the reapers doing everything possible that wouldn't outright alert me to ensure I build it, deliver it and activate it. The rebels in SW knew what would happen if they shot the reactor - I don't know what will happen when I turn on this highly suspicious device. In this case it's me, the protagonist who is an idiot, which is even worse, because I hate being forced to be an idiot. Why am I blindly walking into this trap? (to clarify, that's looking at people's behaviour from in-universe, disregarding what I know of the ending as a player).

2) If it's the other kind of trap - the reapers being sure they can decimate the united fleet, being overconfident and so on - that brings us back to reapers being dumb and ineffective. They are all that remains of prior civilizations, which according to the starchild are preserved in reaper form. They aren't disposable cannon fodder. If the fleet comes to Sol in full force, at least some reapers will die. Why do that, if you can cut them all off in small groups all over the galaxy and then mop them up in your leisure taking zero losses? It's not like the reapers are in any hurry.

As for relays, there is some evidence they are backtracking on it and the EC will show the relays being rebuilt at least in some endings. That way a few centuries down the line there's no real difference whether they were just destroyed and rebuilt or never destroyed at all.

Modifié par a.m.p, 22 avril 2012 - 04:04 .

[mad_yojik]

a.m.p wrote...

Well, what choice did Sovereign have? I killed all his geth inside the hall and was about to ruin his plan, I had to be removed with any means necessary. Why Saren's death dropped his shields is a different question and lies more in the area of videogame cliche than antagonist stupidity. Again, it could have been explained that the fleet shooting him actually dropped his shields and not Shepard, which would make significantly more sense and make individual reapers less ridiculously invincible, which would allow for a comprehensive conventional victory plot without crucible-type ***-pulls.

Mass Effect had everything it needed to become that rare story where the antagonist isn't dumb as a brick.

What choices did Sovereign have? In fact  a lot of. First - its not known how many geth the thing was carrying, but, given 2km length - I'd bet a lot of.  Second its not fleet dropped its shields , but Saren being killed (which said explicitly in ME3 codex), before that it held off entire fleet firepower, so It had plenty of time planning and executing his next step. Add that the ship itself parked on top of the presidium. So if it was smart - it would use a lo of geth to flush off the Shepard, or just blow away part of the control room to vacuum everyone. And any way - as long as it survives - the plan is OK, shepard could do nothing to totally ruin it, exept destroying the Citadel. The simplier way - drop ALL carried geth on the citadel, upload "portal activation" command to each one, and order "go for control room", undock, fly somwhere safe and wait for results. If failed - no hurry, plan another attack... So yes, IMO it was stupid...

But we instead have this:

1) It's a trap. When I say it's a trap, I mean the crucible being a trap and the reapers doing everything possible that wouldn't outright alert me to ensure I build it, deliver it and activate it. The rebels in SW knew what would happen if they shot the reactor - I don't know what will happen when I turn on this highly suspicious device. In this case it's me, the protagonist who is an idiot, which is even worse, because I hate being forced to be an idiot. Why am I blindly walking into this trap? (to clarify, that's looking at people's behaviour from in-universe, disregarding what I know of the ending as a player).

Well if to view it from in-universe, I'd say "Maybe its a trap, maybe not... But its the best we have. And we do know the protheans thought it would work...". But people often say that i'm too trusting person,  so i woudnt say more sceptic one will view this as an idiocy.

2) If it's the other kind of trap - the reapers being sure they can decimate the united fleet, being overconfident and so on - that brings us back to reapers being dumb and ineffective. They are all that remains of prior civilizations, which according to the starchild are preserved in reaper form. They aren't disposable cannon fodder. If the fleet comes to Sol in full force, at least some reapers will die. Why do that, if you can cut them all off in small groups all over the galaxy and then mop them up in your leisure taking zero losses? It's not like the reapers are in any hurry.

Maybe. But as side who is constantly winning - they may be quite prone to overconfidence. I know its stupid to compare, but I lost quite a number of times to "stupid CPU" because of that.

As for relays, there is some evidence they are backtracking on it and the EC will show the relays being rebuilt at least in some endings. That way a few centuries down the line there's no real difference whether they were just destroyed and rebuilt or never destroyed at all.

Well thats good to hear, maybe they'll add this "total war" option after all, gonna make a lot of people happier.

Modifié par mad_yojik, 22 avril 2012 - 06:15 .

[a.m.p]

mad_yojik wrote...

What choices did Sovereign have? In fact  a lot of. First - its not known how many geth the thing was carrying, but, given 2km length - I'd bet a lot of.  Second its not fleet dropped its shields , but Saren being killed (which said explicitly in ME3 codex), before that it held off entire fleet firepower, so It had plenty of time planning and executing his next step. Add that the ship itself parked on top of the presidium. So if it was smart - it would use a lo of geth to flush off the Shepard, or just blow away part of the control room to vacuum everyone. And any way - as long as it survives - the plan is OK, shepard could do nothing to totally ruin it, exept destroying the Citadel. The simplier way - drop ALL carried geth on the citadel, upload "portal activation" command to each one, and order "go for control room", undock, fly somwhere safe and wait for results. If failed - no hurry, plan another attack... So yes, IMO it was stupid...

Yeah, I know about the codex. I meant that it could have been explained differently and in a less stupid way but it wasn't, so that makes Sovereign stupid too, which is sad. I loved that first conversation on Virmire.

Well if to view it from in-universe, I'd say "Maybe its a trap, maybe not... But its the best we have. And we do know the protheans thought it would work...". But people often say that i'm too trusting person,  so i woudnt say more sceptic one will view this as an idiocy.

Well. I'd say in a situation when you are facing an enemy known for elaborate traps, it's best to keep some professional paranoiacs around so they could remind you of the possibilities. My big issue is that never in the game was the crucible ever questioned by anyone. Shepard, who has the prothean warning about the citadel, a huge piece of conveniently placed advanced technology, being a trap burned forever into their brain never questions this new huge piece of conveniently placed advanced technology. Hackett, who is a decorated life-long military officer who was until that point supposed to be preparing and making plans for a conventional war, never questions this new plan that requires him to drop any plans he had developped previously. The council who apparently don't believe a reaper is a reaper when parts of it litter their meeting hall, never question this ***-pull of a plan that requires them to divert resources from defending their homeworlds.Sure they are reluctant to agree, but not because they doubt the crucible itself. And finally, the best and brightest minds of the galaxy who are building this thing never question it even though they are unable to determine what it does. That is a whole new level of stupid on the characters' part that has not been given a scientific definition yet.

Maybe. But as side who is constantly winning - they may be quite prone to overconfidence. I know its stupid to compare, but I lost quite a number of times to "stupid CPU" because of that.

Exactly what I'm talking about. They are half-machines of tremendous processing power, right? They should not be having organic weaknesses like overconfidence. But if they are stupid enough to be overconfident, why can't we talk about it in-game, develop some strategies and use their stupidity against them? Isn't that like the favourite excuse in this situations for why the 'good guys' can beat the 'bad guys'? Wouldn't it be perfectly fitting in this story, where we fight ancient powerful creatures that have been acting on one strategy in the same situation for billions of years and now we can beat them with our ingenuity and adaptability provided by diversity and unity (and an active relay network)?

Modifié par a.m.p, 22 avril 2012 - 06:54 .

[mad_yojik]

a.m.p wrote...

Well. I'd say in a situation when you are facing an enemy known for elaborate traps, it's best to keep some professional paranoiacs around so they could remind you of the possibilities. My big issue is that never in the game was the crucible ever questioned by anyone. Shepard, who has the prothean warning about the citadel, a huge piece of conveniently placed advanced technology, being a trap burned forever into their brain never questions this new huge piece of conveniently placed advanced technology. Hackett, who is a decorated life-long military officer who was until that point supposed to be preparing and making plans for a conventional war, never questions this new plan that requires him to drop any plans he had developped previously. The council who apparently don't believe a reaper is a reaper when parts of it litter their meeting hall, never question this ***-pull of a plan that requires them to divert resources from defending their homeworlds.Sure they are reluctant to agree, but not because they doubt the crucible itself. And finally, the best and brightest minds of the galaxy who are building this thing never question it even though they are unable to determine what it does. That is a whole new level of stupid on the characters' part that has not been given a scientific definition yet.

Maybe... But I just see that as a desperation, for example if reaper force consists of 1-2 thousands of sovereign-class dreadnoughts (and whole galaxy has around 100) - there is only chance, this big f***ing superweapon. No conventional victory possible. If its a fake they are dead anyway. So they grasp on straws, better then just "die fighting impossible battle" IMO.

Exactly what I'm talking about. They are half-machines of tremendous processing power, right? They should not be having organic weaknesses like overconfidence. But if they are stupid enough to be overconfident, why can't we talk about it in-game, develop some strategies and use their stupidity against them? Isn't that like the favourite excuse in this situations for why the 'good guys' can beat the 'bad guys'? Wouldn't it be perfectly fitting in this story, where we fight ancient powerful creatures that have been acting on one strategy in the same situation for billions of years and now we can beat them with our ingenuity and adaptability provided by diversity and unity (and an active relay network)?

They are half-organics, and if I remember correct - there is enough overconfidence in Sovereign speech at Virmire, or in Harbinger's.  And in fact its whether they are beatable conventionaly or not, even given this weekness - its all down to numbers (and in case of game, scenarists.). I just hope they incorporate this idea, I'd like to see happy people here for a change, but IT makes me  .

Modifié par mad_yojik, 22 avril 2012 - 07:42 .

[a.m.p]

mad_yojik wrote...

Maybe... But I just see that as a desperation, for example if reaper force consists of 1-2 thousands of sovereign-class dreadnoughts (and whole galaxy has around 100) - there is only chance, this big f***ing superweapon. No conventional victory possible. If its a fake they are dead anyway. So they grasp on straws, better then just "die fighting impossible battle" IMO.

You know, if I had been told:
1) the numbers that would clearly overwhelm all the technology I had;
2) why I can't shut down the relay network with the citadel and strand them to be killed cluster by cluster;
3) an explanation that made sense to why everyone believes in the crucible (and simple desperation does not work for me here);
4) the destroy choice was discovered by Shepard and was clearly labeled as rejecting the starchild and his ideas and the starchild would try to stop me from picking it;
5) and there would be no stargazer;
I wouldn't mind the endings. There would still be plot holes and troll physics all around, but I would be able to mentally plug them or just ignore them.

Ironically that list above would require more changes to existing content than the conventional compromise, so I too hope the latter could be implemented.
About reapers. So... is the glass half full or half empty?:innocent:

Modifié par a.m.p, 22 avril 2012 - 08:04 .

[Raynulf]

a.m.p wrote...

You know, if I had been told:
1) the numbers that would clearly overwhelm all the technology I had;
2) why I can't shut down the relay network with the citadel and strand them to be killed cluster by cluster;
3) an explanation that made sense to why everyone believes in the crucible (and simple desperation does not work for me here);
4) the destroy choice was discovered by Shepard and was clearly labeled as rejecting the starchild and his ideas and the starchild would try to stop me from picking it;
5) and there would be no stargazer;

I wouldn't mind the endings. There would still be plot holes and troll physics all around, but I would be able to mentally plug them or just ignore them.

Ironically that list above would require more changes to existing content than the conventional compromise, so I too hope the latter could be implemented.

I'd add in:
6) A more believable origin of the crucible design (both in the development of it and Shepard obtaining it)

Currently it looks like this:

During each Harvest, while the reapers have isolated every system and are wiping out the civilisation, each race has found plans left behind by the last cycle, developed them further and then hidden them for the next cycle. With no government, crippled communication and while being slaughtered by deathbots. And not once has the reapers ever found out about it and stopped to make sure that all records of it were wiped out along with all records of themselves. Nor has any cycle found it before their personal apocolypse and developed and built it to see what it did.

Thus, in our cycle, we find it in the datacache [RetCon] Prothean grand library on Mars, a source of data we've had access to for 40 years. But Liara and her "contacts" find it over the course of a couple of months while Shepard sits in house arrest and the Reapers mosey on over to eat Earth. But not in her previous 50 years of obsessively focused field research on Prothean xenoarchaeology... which apparently didn't include the Mars grand library of all things Prothean.


A more believable explanation would be:

The Crucible was a super-weapon research project being developed at the Ilos research facility, inspired by the progress on Mass Relay development. The Protheans had known for centuries that the Citadel was the hub of the relay network, and the goal of the Crucible project was to weaponise the Citadel: Allowing it to overload and detonate any Relay in the galaxy, wiping out the solar system it was in. The design, while extremely developed, was immensely theoretical and relied on attachment to a device codenamed "The Catalyst".

In ME3, researchers on Ilos had uncovered a number of Prothean record banks frozen in solid state and suffering only minimal decay. Among these are plans for some kind of colossal device of unknown intent, though the last few records within the files indicate it could be used to stop the Reapers. However, no records detailing what the "Catalyst" component is can be found at that location.

Modifié par Raynulf, 23 avril 2012 - 08:59 .

[mad_yojik]

a.m.p wrote...

You know, if I had been told:
1) the numbers that would clearly overwhelm all the technology I had;
2) why I can't shut down the relay network with the citadel and strand them to be killed cluster by cluster;
3) an explanation that made sense to why everyone believes in the crucible (and simple desperation does not work for me here);
4) the destroy choice was discovered by Shepard and was clearly labeled as rejecting the starchild and his ideas and the starchild would try to stop me from picking it;
5) and there would be no stargazer;
I wouldn't mind the endings. There would still be plot holes and troll physics all around, but I would be able to mentally plug them or just ignore them.

Ironically that list above would require more changes to existing content than the conventional compromise, so I too hope the latter could be implemented.
About reapers. So... is the glass half full or half empty?:innocent:

Quite true, the game lacks this explanations. Though the question #2 is IMO pretty self-explanatory (I doublt any race exept Reapers can repair "reaper tech" which citadel definitely is). The whole starchild plot is of poor quality, the endings would raise a lot less questions if they were given by team or Hakket, but since its already in place, i dont think it should be changed (even with IT to support it, lets not start breaking things). Lets just hope they are reading this thread, there is a lot of ppl with "mature attidue" here, instead of lots of "AARGH, they cheated me, false adverts!!! :ph34r:" and  "no happy ending... whine whine... [smilie]../../../images/forum/emoticons/crying.png[/smilie]"  threads here ad there.

Btw is "stargazer" and "starchild"the same? If not - who/what do you refer as "stargazer", the kid with grandpa in final scene?

About the reapers, the glass question reminds me of Legion coversation in ME2, just replace one line about watching organics or Shepard...
-Is the glass half full or half empty?
-Yes
-Which one?
-Both

P.S. I know only one book which isnt filled with plotholes... But its a learning book on Mathematics

Modifié par mad_yojik, 23 avril 2012 - 09:07 .

[mad_yojik]

Raynulf wrote...

I'd add in:
6) A more believable origin of the crucible design (both in the development of it and Shepard obtaining it)

Currently it looks like this:

During each Harvest, while the reapers have isolated every system and are wiping out the civilisation, each race has found plans left behind by the last cycle, developed them further and then hidden them for the next cycle. With no government, crippled communication and while being slaughtered by deathbots. And not once has the reapers ever found out about it and stopped to make sure that all records of it were wiped out along with all records of themselves. Nor has any cycle found it before their personal apocolypse and developed and built it to see what it did.

Thus, in our cycle, we find it in the datacache [RetCon] Prothean grand library on Mars, a source of data we've had access to for 40 years. But Liara and her "contacts" find it over the course of a couple of months while Shepard sits in house arrest and the Reapers mosey on over to eat Earth. But not in her previous 50 years of obsessively focused field research on Prothean xenoarchaeology... which apparently didn't include the Mars grand library of all things Prothean.

The whole crucible thingy is very controversal with lore fom ME1. ME1,
Vigil on Ilos:  "reapers jump in through the citadel, disable all relays
and then harvest  "one sector at a time"". ME3, Hakket: "Crucible is a
massive project, we will need all possible help and resourses from ALL
races to finish it". Only me having odd feeling how this is stacks on
top of each other? How exactly massive research/construction project
could be done by shattered Prothean empire?

A more believable explanation would be:

The Crucible was a super-weapon research project being developed at the Ilos research facility, inspired by the progress on Mass Relay development. The Protheans had known for centuries that the Citadel was the hub of the relay network, and the goal of the Crucible project was to weaponise the Citadel: Allowing it to overload and detonate any Relay in the galaxy, wiping out the solar system it was in. The design, while extremely developed, was immensely theoretical and relied on attachment to a device codenamed "The Catalyst".

In ME3, researchers on Ilos had uncovered a number of Prothean record banks frozen in solid state and suffering only minimal decay. Among these are plans for some kind of colossal device of unknown intent, though the last few records within the files indicate it could be used to stop the Reapers. However, no records detailing what the "Catalyst" component is can be found at that location.

More viable explanation, though I'd change "Allowing it to overload and detonate any Relay in the galaxy, wiping out the solar system it was in." just into "turning relay into a giant energy weapon", or such research wouldnt make any sense.Especially in ME3 relays are not turned into supernovas, they just emit RGB wave, and destroyed in process.

Modifié par mad_yojik, 23 avril 2012 - 09:33 .

[Elyiia]

I think the best explanation for the crucible is for it to be a Reaper trap. It doesn't make sense that the one piece of information that is passed down between each and every cycle is a superweapon. It's been passed down something like 20,000 cycles. Surely the Reapers would have discovered it at some point.

[a.m.p]

Raynulf worte...
I'd add in:
6) A more believable origin of the crucible design (both in the development of it and Shepard obtaining it)

Absolutely.

Elyiia wrote...

I think the best explanation for the crucible is for it to be a Reaper trap. It doesn't make sense that the one piece of information that is passed down between each and every cycle is a superweapon. It's been passed down something like 20,000 cycles. Surely the Reapers would have discovered it at some point.

I'd have bought it if it was explained as a reaper trap that was modified a few (and I mean, few) cycles back to work against the reapers too.

I'd have bought it if it was a device developped by an advanced civilization (again, a few cycles back) that simply couldn't use it because they had no access to the citadel. And using the citadel would be part of the original design.

I'd have bought it if it was just a useless money and resources sink that didn't to anything at all except weakening organic civilizations that built it and we had to fall back to our war assets when that fact was revealed.

I'd have bought it if it was what Raynulf suggests.

@mad_yojik
Yep, the stargazer is that granpda after the credits that basically tells you "so you were thinking how to rebuild civilization in a reasonable amount of time after all that? Guess what, it wasn't rebuilt! <insert trollface here>"

And you're absolutely right, ME3 lore basically cancels half of ME1. At least they didn't bring whomever you left on Virmire back so you wouldn't miss out on content.

Modifié par a.m.p, 23 avril 2012 - 10:10 .

[a.m.p]

Also, now this thread is in the link collection of the Data Cache monster thread.

[Elyiia]

If I had written it, the designs would have been left by the Reapers as a plan B in case plan A failed. However, with the tampering by each cycle there's a weakness that Shepard can exploit to destroy communications between the Reapers. Without being able to communicate they lose their strength in fighting in format and we start to fight a winning war against them.

The reason they leave the Citadel in control of the cycle until that point is to try and force a last fight, because at that point they're going to win in a straight battle. The reason they leave the beam open is so that we'll decimate our own troops trying to reach it. The reason they only have a Destroyer guarding the beam is because it really doesn't even matter if they reach it or not.