239 réponses à ce sujet

[Wowlock]

The series had many sub-plots but ever since Eden Prime, MAIN PLOT and THEME was gathering the galaxy to fight the Reapers ! Not Syntethics...but the REAPERS. In fact it was such an uphill battle that galaxy didn't believe you throughout the whole first 2 games...

There were SUB-Plots about syntethic conflict ( tying with Tali and Quarians and some AI-VI side-quests ) But it was NEVER pointed as the reason why Shepard fights. We solved that little problem on Rannoch...End of that little Sub-plot there whether for better or worse.

But in the end, when you IGNORE the rest of what the game is about , discard our choices in the matter and force A SUB-PLOT to become the backbone of your ridiculous logic even AFTER you RESOLVED the matter..... It is plain BAD writing. Not deep, not artistic...it is just BAD.

[Averdi]

Slash1667 wrote...

Averdi wrote...

Up until the end of ME3, the organic vs synthetic relationship has been a subplot to the main story, at best. In that, it's like the issues of morality surrounding the genophage or questions of racial superiority/priority via Ashley and/or Cerberus.

The catalyst could have as easily said that the reapers do their thing because advanced organics always manipulate less advanced organics (e.g. salaraians and krogan), and thus should be removed to allow 'natural' organic evolution. That would have had as much support as the organic vs synthetic rationale, though without the additional irony of the reapers themselves being synthetic.....

Actually, following the Catalyst's logic, the Reapers aren't synthetic. They are a hybrid. Using organic matter to create a synthetic appearing creation.

They're synthetic.  As a rule, they exhibit no traits, characteristics, or motivations of the races they exterminate and from which they are 'created.'  They have a few generally uniform profiles and appear unconflicted in their purpose of visiting on subsequent races the genocide that they themselves supposedly recieved.  I've seen no evidence that the 'immortalization' of organic species in reaper form is anything deeper than using organics as partial building components; no more than a plastic lawn chair 'immortalizes' the myriad prehistoric organisms that were converted into petroleum.

Modifié par Averdi, 07 avril 2012 - 08:53 .

[Sirartistic]

pistolols wrote...

Personally i think ME2 messed everyone up made everyone think it was all about the characters which was never my take at all and in fact i found ME2 to be rather tedious dealing with all these characters personal problems that i didn't even care about.

I always knew the heart of this was a conflict of man vs machine. And i loved the way the end tied everything together in the form of an AI behind it all... it was pretty mind blowing to behonest.

They did not tie anything together. The Geth were never a threat to the galaxy, the Reapers were! Marc Walters simply tried to hard to make the game appear smart and artsy. What a pack of bull. There is nothing smart about the ending. If bioware came out and said that they were attempting to change how games were played, meaning that they planned to release the complete ending months later for specific reasons, then I would give Bioware props for trying to do something different. But as it stands, they come across like a bunch of hacks trying to sound smart...

[pistolols]

Wowlock wrote...

The series had many sub-plots but ever since Eden Prime, MAIN PLOT and THEME was gathering the galaxy to fight the Reapers ! Not Syntethics...but the REAPERS. In fact it was such an uphill battle that galaxy didn't believe you throughout the whole first 2 games...

There were SUB-Plots about syntethic conflict ( tying with Tali and Quarians and some AI-VI side-quests ) But it was NEVER pointed as the reason why Shepard fights. We solved that little problem on Rannoch...End of that little Sub-plot there whether for better or worse.

But in the end, when you IGNORE the rest of what the game is about , discard our choices in the matter and force A SUB-PLOT to become the backbone of your ridiculous logic even AFTER you RESOLVED the matter..... It is plain BAD writing. Not deep, not artistic...it is just BAD.

I disagree the geth rebeling against the quarians is a huge deal.

Modifié par pistolols, 07 avril 2012 - 08:52 .

[Cyberfrog81]

pistolols wrote...
Why would you not choose any of the options?  Do you not trust that the crucible is doing what it's supposed to? 

The Crucible is desperate. They have no idea what it does, but if it can potentially defeat the Reapers we've got to build it, right? I thought it was just too convenient, and believed it to be a Reaper trap, as did others.

The Reapers are a nightmare factory, they are not friends of organics. The Catalyst claims the new options are thanks to the Crucible, and that Shepard is free to choose, but I don't buy it.  He is the enemy and I don't trust him.

So while I may be mistaken, I choose to believe that we still don't know why the Reapers reap, and that "James Bond / Jack Bauer in space" would not fall for this deception.


I'm well aware that leaves me without an ending, and the cycle will probably still continue. May as well let Marauder Shields do his thing. I guess I'm just hoping that Hudson can make this right, that he can deliver on his promises and stop hiding behind "artistic integrity". Not just for me or for the people who happen to agree with me, but because the game (heck, the trilogy) itself deserves a worthy ending! Not this nonsensical pseudo-philosophical crap masquerading as art.

Modifié par Cyberfrog81, 09 avril 2012 - 10:30 .

[uke2se]

balance5050 wrote...
The problem with your perception is you seem to think that you were supposed to get it the first time. Most people didn't but then you start looking deeper into the anomolys, and eventually have that "EUREKA!" moment. It was entirely there intention to overload youwith WTF at the end, then solve the mystery IN YOUR OWN HEAD. It's supposed to be Metagaming, but I'll be honest, lots of people just didn't get it. 

The problem with that is that ME isn't a series of mystery games. They are a series of action RPG shooters with focus on character and choices. Ending such a game with a "here's a loose ball, make it up yourself" kind of ending would be like ending The Lord of the Rings trilogy with a Zombie Apocalypse and Frodo and Sam holding out in a mall.

[UrgentArchengel]

Even now, as I continue to think, I really think it is all about free will. Yes, their are tons of themes, but every theme has point it is trying to convey, and I believe it is free will, and the fear of the chaos that free will creates.

To convey my point, The Reapers are the true antithesis of Free Will, they try to control the evolution of life to their way, and when it gets to the point where they think chaos will truly begin, they execute deletion of all advanced organics.  Reapers also indoctrinate, forcing people to their cause, to view them like gods and to bend us to their will.  Shepard is all about free will, and the final decision is about either maintaining order, creating chaos, or finding a middle ground.  I am not trying to say the endings are good, they were really badly executed.

Modifié par UrgentArchengel, 07 avril 2012 - 09:00 .

[uke2se]

pistolols wrote...
I disagree the geth rebeling against the quarians is a huge deal.

As is the two races living in peace at the end, thus proving the Crucible wrong.

[CronoDragoon]

pistolols wrote...


I disagree the geth rebeling against the quarians is a huge deal.

No one else in the galaxy cares. Do you see a lot of people uniting to go to Rannoch and take out the geth? Until the Reapers the geth were a peripheral threat and nothing more.

[apieros]

balance5050 wrote...

but I'll be honest, lots of people just didn't get it. 

Then the writer's ****ed up. They didn't lay the proper groundwork for understanding.

More, their own material deliberately contradicted the supposed inevitable conflict that always arises in all civilizations (re: organics and synthetics always genociding each other). Were this the central theme, then the character of EDI and the Quarian/Geth resolution directly contradicted it. And nothing in the third game supported it.

If this were intended to be the central theme, the axle around which the whole trilogy revolved, there should have been characters embodying the central conflict (as Mordin and Wrex did for the genophage), and clear signs that it was an inevitable conflict.

As another example, even if you could broker a temporary peace between the Quarians and Geth, there should have been clear signs it was only temporary. Or factions from each who carried on the battle, despite the galactic peril.

None of this happened. The conflict is only asserted at the end, by an unreliable character who provides no evidence to support his own contentions.

The writers ****ed up.

As a result, "This conflict is the center of the entire series!" is just as delusional a rationalization of the botched ending as Indoc Theory.

EDIT: And you don't have to "think about it" to get what they were saying. They explicitly said it. It wasn't a thinky, deep ending.

The problem isn't "people just didn't get it." The problem is: we heard it, got, and thought it was bull****. The entire third game contradicted the bull**** assertions of the Starchild.

So if that's what they intended, they ****ed up.

Modifié par apieros, 07 avril 2012 - 09:02 .

[Zix13]

balance5050 wrote...

apieros wrote...

pistolols wrote...

Nobody was paying attention.

Then the writers ****ed up. If this truly was their driving theme, and the vast majority of the players went "WTF?" at the end, the fault is the writers', not the players'.

Your blame is misplaced. As is your praise.

The problem with your perception is you seem to think that you were supposed to get it the first time. Most people didn't but then you start looking deeper into the anomolys, and eventually have that "EUREKA!" moment. It was entirely there intention to overload youwith WTF at the end, then solve the mystery IN YOUR OWN HEAD. It's supposed to be Metagaming, but I'll be honest, lots of people just didn't get it. 

Problem is that's not what Mass Effect is about. It's all been literal, character driven, cause and effect story. We all see what they were trying to do, however, it didn't belong in the series. You wouldn't end a Die Hard movie like the Matrix. 

[davishepard]

The Charnel Expanse wrote...

Joeyv wrote...

Man. The arrogance of thinking you know the game better than members of the team who developed the damn game series..

Sorry, but anyone who paid attention to the first 99.9% of the trilogy would realize what the central theme is. It doesn't take any degree of arrogance to understand a work. And just because the guy is credited with creating a franchise doesn't mean Hudson has full authority over its contents. He might have had his own vision of where to take it, but clearly Karpyshyn, who was the head writer for the first two games, was the one exercising the most creative control and setting the parameters for what the story was actually about.

So I must say, you are not Karpyshyn. You are not the responsible for any game contents and so you are being arrogant in saying that the creators don't know what the games is about, but you do.

[balance5050]

uke2se wrote...

balance5050 wrote...
The problem with your perception is you seem to think that you were supposed to get it the first time. Most people didn't but then you start looking deeper into the anomolys, and eventually have that "EUREKA!" moment. It was entirely there intention to overload youwith WTF at the end, then solve the mystery IN YOUR OWN HEAD. It's supposed to be Metagaming, but I'll be honest, lots of people just didn't get it. 

The problem with that is that ME isn't a series of mystery games. They are a series of action RPG shooters with focus on character and choices. Ending such a game with a "here's a loose ball, make it up yourself" kind of ending would be like ending The Lord of the Rings trilogy with a Zombie Apocalypse and Frodo and Sam holding out in a mall.

It does indeed try to do to many things at once, with I.T. in mind it suddenly turns the game in to a horror, psychological thriller, mystery, in addition to everything it was before. Yes, trying to do this in the last 15 minutes is a weakness, but it's also what makes it so appealing.

Modifié par balance5050, 07 avril 2012 - 09:01 .

[Turran]

Surely at this point, Bioware know their game better than you? As they have all the theories and ideas they could easily formulate into THEIR universe which would automatically make it cannon?

So really... You clearly don't "get it".

(If you don't like it and they do, we must be missing something)

[CronoDragoon]

balance5050 wrote...

It does indeed try to do to many things at once, with I.T. in mind it suddenly turns the game in to a horroor, psychological thriller, mystery, in addition to everything it was before. Yes, trying to do this in the last 15 minutes is a weakness, but it's also what makes it so appealing.

If you are a believer in IT, then yeah the ending does have some depth to it. But most people post-PAX have decided that it was meant literally, and that changes everything.

[The Charnel Expanse]

davishepard wrote...

The Charnel Expanse wrote...

Joeyv wrote...

Man. The arrogance of thinking you know the game better than members of the team who developed the damn game series..

Sorry, but anyone who paid attention to the first 99.9% of the trilogy would realize what the central theme is. It doesn't take any degree of arrogance to understand a work. And just because the guy is credited with creating a franchise doesn't mean Hudson has full authority over its contents. He might have had his own vision of where to take it, but clearly Karpyshyn, who was the head writer for the first two games, was the one exercising the most creative control and setting the parameters for what the story was actually about.

So I must say, you are not Karpyshyn. You are not the responsible for any game contents and so you are being arrogant in saying that the creators don't know what the games is about, but you do.

Seems like you're trying to pick a fight with me over the topic title without reading what I'm actually saying.
The proof is in the game scripts. If you think I'm wrong in saying they abandoned the theme of the series in the final few minutes, then prove me wrong. Don't think calling me arrogant somehow destroys the veracity of what I'm saying.

[DevilBeast]

UrgentArchengel wrote...

Even now, as I continue to think, I really think it is all about free will. Yes, their are tons of themes, but every theme has point it is trying to convey, and I believe it is free will, and the fear of the chaos that free will creates.

Chaos is certaintly what the Catalyst (or those who created it, since I think it´s basically just a VI, much like the prothean VI´s) seems to fear. It certaintly believed that chaos is a product of the free will.

[uke2se]

balance5050 wrote...
It does indeed try to do to many things at once, with I.T. in mind it suddenly turns the game in to a horroor, psychological thriller, mystery, in addition to everything it was before. Yes, trying to do this in the last 15 minutes is a weakness, but it's also what makes it so appealing.

If the IT is shown to be correct (I hope but can't believe), I would be glad that the ending the game deserved was finally in place, and I would be angry at Bioware and EA for making me pay full price for an incomplete game. Sure, we'll get an ending DLC for free, but I don't think we would have without the major uproar there has been. We would have had to pay for the game's ending. That sort of thing shouldn't be encouraged.

[Zix13]

pistolols wrote...
Why would you not choose any of the options?  Do you not trust that the crucible is doing what it's supposed to? 

a) no reason to trust starkid, every reason not to
you **** over the galaxy either way. One might consider it to be better to fight a common enemy to the last than die fighting each other for resources.
c) Control is likely to backfire, like it did for TIM
d) Synthesis is a morally horrifying option, and is what the reapers want anyways
e) Destroy is the only real option, but you destroy the geth and the relays, and doom everyone else anyways(see ) 

[RADIUMEYEZ]

pistolols wrote...

Personally i think ME2 messed everyone up made everyone think it was all about the characters which was never my take at all and in fact i found ME2 to be rather tedious dealing with all these characters personal problems that i didn't even care about.

I always knew the heart of this was a conflict of man vs machine. And i loved the way the end tied everything together in the form of an AI behind it all... it was pretty mind blowing to behonest.

Can't agree with you on this and now you are making it sound more like the story to Terminator but you are entitled to your opinion.

[balance5050]

CronoDragoon wrote...

balance5050 wrote...

It does indeed try to do to many things at once, with I.T. in mind it suddenly turns the game in to a horroor, psychological thriller, mystery, in addition to everything it was before. Yes, trying to do this in the last 15 minutes is a weakness, but it's also what makes it so appealing.

If you are a believer in IT, then yeah the ending does have some depth to it. But most people post-PAX have decided that it was meant literally, and that changes everything.

So what a bunch of people think changes everything? No, they said they don't want to confirm or deny because they don't want to be "prescriptive". PRE-SCRIPTIVE, if they were to start commenting on what's right or wring with I.T. they would be giving away the impact that the DLC will have.

It's good that you're trying to be like everyone else though.

[davishepard]

The Charnel Expanse wrote...

Seems like you're trying to pick a fight with me over the topic title without reading what I'm actually saying.
The proof is in the game scripts. If you think I'm wrong in saying they abandoned the theme of the series in the final few minutes, then prove me wrong. Don't think calling me arrogant somehow destroys the veracity of what I'm saying.

I don't need to prove nothing, because you are wrong as it is. You are totally wrong in saying that you know more that the game creators, no matter the points you make. You are just wrong.

[The Charnel Expanse]

davishepard wrote...

The Charnel Expanse wrote...

Seems like you're trying to pick a fight with me over the topic title without reading what I'm actually saying.
The proof is in the game scripts. If you think I'm wrong in saying they abandoned the theme of the series in the final few minutes, then prove me wrong. Don't think calling me arrogant somehow destroys the veracity of what I'm saying.

I don't need to prove nothing, because you are wrong as it is. You are totally wrong in saying that you know more that the game creators, no matter the points you make. You are just wrong.

So in other words, "neener neener, you're wrong!"

Gotcha.

[DevilBeast]

RADIUMEYEZ wrote...

pistolols wrote...

Personally i think ME2 messed everyone up made everyone think it was all about the characters which was never my take at all and in fact i found ME2 to be rather tedious dealing with all these characters personal problems that i didn't even care about.

I always knew the heart of this was a conflict of man vs machine. And i loved the way the end tied everything together in the form of an AI behind it all... it was pretty mind blowing to behonest.

Can't agree with you on this and now you are making it sound more like the story to Terminator but you are entitled to your opinion.

Well, the human reaper in ME2 did look like something from Terminator

[Billabong2011]

pistolols wrote...

The Charnel Expanse wrote...

pistolols wrote...

Personally i think ME2 messed everyone up made everyone think it was all about the characters which was never my take at all and in fact i found ME2 to be rather tedious dealing with all these characters personal problems that i didn't even care about.

I always knew the heart of this was a conflict of man vs machine. And i loved the way the end tied everything together in the form of an AI behind it all... it was pretty mind blowing to behonest.

You represent a tiny minority.

Yeah because most people don't pay attention.  The final choice of the game, for example, to control or destory synthetic lifeforms is a conflict brought up NUMEROUS times throughout the series.  It is absolutely a major theme.

......
mmmmmm So many things wrong with this statement.

I respect your opinion, but please don't belittle our intelligence.

Not that the organic-synthetic conflict wasn't A theme of the trilogy, but it was not the CENTRAL theme of the trilogy, which was the value of self-actualized destiny (opposing the inevitable threat with little chance of survival as opposed to ceding to the cycle that repeats itself every 50,000 years). Throughout the game, this is what defines one as 'human' or 'alive' or, arguably, as having a 'soul' - no matter organic OR synthetic (and I quote, LEGION, A SYNTHETIC: "An interesting choice, Shepard-Commander. Your species was offered everything the geth aspire to. True unity, understanding, transcendence. You rejected it. You even refused to use the Old Machines' gifts to achieve it on your species' own terms. You are more like us than we thought.") 

This was the most important theme to resolve at the game's end - if only one theme was to be the focus of the conclusion, this was it - and was, instead, slaughtered seamlessly.

So yes, I do pay attention.

EDITED to add: Why else do you think 'choice' - whether it be upon Shepard's shoulders or a mechanic of the game itself - was the most defining factor of the series? It wasn't just for show.

Modifié par Billabong2011, 07 avril 2012 - 09:12 .