204 réponses à ce sujet

[ChildOfEden]

Mungolian_ wrote...

 Yeah. 'Cause foreshadowing in an optional side-mission I barely ever did is totally a good idea. 

Cerberus was forshadowed in ME1 in an optional side-quest. Now they're the most important points in ME 2 and 3...

[Iwillbeback]

ChildOfEden wrote...

Mungolian_ wrote...

 Yeah. 'Cause foreshadowing in an optional side-mission I barely ever did is totally a good idea. 

Cerberus was forshadowed in ME1 in an optional side-quest. Now they're the most important points in ME 2 and 3...

I see your point and I agree that it was forshadowed.
There was only one way it ended much like the side mission but there was closure, you learned all the relevant information about how and why it came to be.
Starchild should take notes from this AI.
After completing this side mission I felt satisfied.

Modifié par Iwillbeback, 07 mai 2012 - 12:02 .

[The Night Mammoth]

ChildOfEden wrote...

Mungolian_ wrote...

 Yeah. 'Cause foreshadowing in an optional side-mission I barely ever did is totally a good idea. 

Cerberus was forshadowed in ME1 in an optional side-quest. Now they're the most important points in ME 2 and 3...

You don't see the difference there? 

We have this gambling AI, that was dealt with very early on in ME1 when ME3's plot hadn't even been realized yet, that was entirely optional and completely unimportant to the plot. Between that point and the ending there is nothing except Javik, another optional part of the game, that keeps this as a prevalent or important plot point and theme. 

On the other hand we have Cerberus, who were put in the spotlight, fleshed out and explained, kept as an important factor in the plot throughout ME2 and then ME3, whilst having their foundations built in ME1. 

There's nothing else to be said. Cerberus were constantly important to the plot. This gambling AI never was. 

On the actualy issue: it was kind of foreshadowed. 

The Catalyst says synthetics will always attempt to wipe out all organic life, and cannot be defeated. That's not what the AI in ME1 was saying. 

There's literally nothing in ME's story that foreshadows the Catalyst's specific point, which is why it feels so disconnected. It's a major shift in the plot's focus that isn't supported. There's no reason for me to care about what the kid says, believe it, or think it's important. It can basically be ignored and the plot looses nothing of import. 

Modifié par The Night Mammoth, 07 mai 2012 - 12:12 .

[Mass effect 2 forever]

ChildOfEden wrote...

In ME1 the ending for ME3 was foreshadowed way before anyone could have guessed.


[*]y.[/list]

[*]I don't disagree with the themes BUT the artbook clearly says that Bioware rewrote the ending and that origionally it wasn't going to have any of the choices. It was going to be a straight up good vs evil thing ending

[*]Also, it should be very obvious that synthesis was coming. But a lot of people felt it come from left-field. Control and destruction were foreshadowed. The trouble is that trans-humanism as a concept (we evolve or we die) does not mesh very well with a lot of the series stress on negociation, choice, free will and altruism. The two concepts are immeidately jarring. Once Bioware started introducing clear examples of org/syn getting along and amknig it clear that organics were just at fault they started to create an impression totally counter to what that sort of ending would entail.
[*]In order for it to have worked it should have made the Geth like skynet and betray the Quarians as soon as able. Every AI should have lacked any kind of emotion or capacity to reason with the sole exception of the reapers who are the organic hybrid guardians. If EDI and the other machines only aid you because they are enslaved by their programming and maybe have EDI betray the crew once they are removed to proove this point. They made synthetics so like us already that it made arguing there was a vast gulf that needed to be bridged non-sensical.

Modifié par Mass effect 2 forever, 07 mai 2012 - 12:26 .

[ChildOfEden]

The Night Mammoth wrote...

ChildOfEden wrote...

Mungolian_ wrote...

 Yeah. 'Cause foreshadowing in an optional side-mission I barely ever did is totally a good idea. 

Cerberus was forshadowed in ME1 in an optional side-quest. Now they're the most important points in ME 2 and 3...

You don't see the difference there? 

We have this gambling AI, that was dealt with very early on in ME1 when ME3's plot hadn't even been realized yet, that was entirely optional and completely unimportant to the plot. Between that point and the ending there is nothing except Javik, another optional part of the game, that keeps this as a prevalent or important plot point and theme. 

On the other hand we have Cerberus, who were put in the spotlight, fleshed out and explained, kept as an important factor in the plot throughout ME2 and then ME3, whilst having their foundations built in ME1. 

There's nothing else to be said. Cerberus were constantly important to the plot. This gambling AI never was. 

On the actualy issue: it was kind of foreshadowed. 

The Catalyst says synthetics will always attempt to wipe out all organic life, and cannot be defeated. That's not what the AI in ME1 was saying. 

There's literally nothing in ME's story that foreshadows the Catalyst's specific point, which is why it feels so disconnected. It's a major shift in the plot's focus that isn't supported. There's no reason for me to care about what the kid says, believe it, or think it's important. It can basically be ignored and the plot looses nothing of import. 

Obviously you never played ME1 because never was Cerberus "fleshed out." Cerberus has never been foreshadowed in ME2 if we use the logic that ME1's side mission's aren't allowed to be used as foreshadowing tools. But again, Cerberus would never have been known or even used if it wasn't established in ME1, so thusly the side missions do matter, and in effect the synthetics vs. organics was established and foreshadowed (and not just in that particular instance.)

Modifié par ChildOfEden, 08 mai 2012 - 03:31 .