233 réponses à ce sujet

[PsyrenY]

M0keys wrote...

Well, if we're blaming 2 guys for this mess, I guess it's not surprising that they somehow have literally no idea when they're punching us in the face with a big "DEATH SCENE " sign.

I saw no such sign. Unless you think people die every time they close their eyes, you're reading things into the scene that aren't there.

I certainly think he was in critical condition, but there have been other characters (like Garrus) in just as bad shape throughout the series.

[M0keys]

Optimystic_X wrote...

M0keys wrote...

Well, if we're blaming 2 guys for this mess, I guess it's not surprising that they somehow have literally no idea when they're punching us in the face with a big "DEATH SCENE " sign.

I saw no such sign. Unless you think people die every time they close their eyes, you're reading things into the scene that aren't there.

Oh... my god.. *slams head into table*

I CAN NOT COMPREHEND YOU. I AM BACTERIA.

And thus ends our argument.

[Sepharih]

Optimystic_X 
So are the Quarians indoctrinated too? Not only do they use cybernetic implants, they actually enter symbiosis with the Geth if you save both, artificially enhancing their immune systems.

It's simple Transhumanism (or Trans-organic-ism, for the aliens), just accelerated.

Well as I said: 
Forcibly merging all synthetics and organics is hardly equatible to the fact that quarians and even our hero use implants.  There's a lot of overlap and intermingling amongst the various races, but it would be antithetical to the themes of the series to suggest that the only way to resolve their differences is to have them merge together completely as the catalyst does.

[Hudathan]

Having a smaller, slower, and weaker fleet than the Reapers and still coming out ahead in a direct fight goes against the entire game way more than the Crucible ever could. The game is only intense because of the severity of the situation, the futility of resistance and the suspense in putting all your hopes and dreams in a device you're not even sure would work.

Having the Reapers suddenly lay down before a fleet of inferior organics simply because Shepard and co. 'wanted' to win would go against everything that made the game suspenseful and unique as a piece of fiction.

[PsyrenY]

Sepharih wrote...

Well as I said: 
Forcibly merging all synthetics and organics is hardly equatible to the fact that quarians and even our hero use implants.  There's a lot of overlap and intermingling amongst the various races, but it would be antithetical to the themes of the series to suggest that the only way to resolve their differences is to have them merge together completely as the catalyst does.

If you genuinely don't believe that, don't pick that ending - problem solved.

Me? My Shepard is convinced that's where technology will take us anyway, so the chance to prevent any future organic-synthetic conflicts along the way is just a bonus.

[Taleroth]

Hudathan wrote...

Having a smaller, slower, and weaker fleet than the Reapers and still coming out ahead in a direct fight goes against the entire game way more than the Crucible ever could.

Isn't that more or less what happened at the end of Mass Effect 2?

A weaker ship going blind into a situation where the enemies have every single possible advantage, yet kicking their quads and mooning them on the way out. Maybe the upgraded Normandy is a better ship, but you could go in with absolutely no upgrades and lose like 3 people.

Modifié par Taleroth, 09 avril 2012 - 03:12 .

[humes spork]

M0keys wrote...

Oh... my god.. *slams head into table*

I CAN NOT COMPREHEND YOU. I AM BACTERIA.

And thus ends our argument.

He's using a Prima guide as a source. That says something, right there.

[Sepharih]

Hudathan wrote...

Having a smaller, slower, and weaker fleet than the Reapers and still coming out ahead in a direct fight goes against the entire game way more than the Crucible ever could. The game is only intense because of the severity of the situation, the futility of resistance and the suspense in putting all your hopes and dreams in a device you're not even sure would work.

Having the Reapers suddenly lay down before a fleet of inferior organics simply because Shepard and co. 'wanted' to win would go against everything that made the game suspenseful and unique as a piece of fiction.

The crucible isn't really what goes against the game in my view...it's the catalyst.  These are two seperate things and for the purposes of the story you can have one without the other (or rather you can have the citadel be the catalyst, as was stated).  Remove the entire scene with the catalyst, end with the crucible firing, and then tack on the extended cut dlc for closure with the characters and I'll be fine.

I prefer a victory with just the fleet and I find it fits more with the themes of conquering impossible odds and unity with diversity and I think it would be far more cathartic, but that's just my preference.

humes spork wrote...

Sepharih wrote...

This is not "every major situation", this is meant to be the emotional climax of the story.
How about the decision to destroy the collector base?  What was the material gain for that?

The subtext of the entire Cerberus arc is TIM, despite having started as a well-intentioned extremist, went off the moral rails long before the Collectors made themselves a threat. Hell, the subtext of the Evolution comic series is that he's been a high-functioning Indoctrinated for decades. He can't be trusted with the Collector tech, because even if he wasn't Indoctrinated while Shepard was still in diapers his "ascension at any cost" ideology is dangerous, self-serving and would ultimately cost the species their very humanity.

To put it another way, TIM is Faust, humankind is Gretchen, Harbinger is Mephistopheles and the Collector base is the pen by which TIM would sign the contract.

Fair enough, but I still think it's an underwhelming end to Shepard's character arc to have him just nod and be handled by the originator of the entire genocide.  Would have been more emotionally satisfying to spit in his face metaphorically.

[PsyrenY]

humes spork wrote...
He's using a Prima guide as a source. That says something, right there.

You realize they get notes from Bioware before writing them, right? Or did you think they beat the game and printed all the walkthroughs within minutes of release?

And Prima didn't write the game files, last time I checked.
Sheesh, to think I was agreeing with you earlier.

[Sepharih]

Optimystic_X wrote...

Sepharih wrote...

Well as I said: 
Forcibly merging all synthetics and organics is hardly equatible to the fact that quarians and even our hero use implants.  There's a lot of overlap and intermingling amongst the various races, but it would be antithetical to the themes of the series to suggest that the only way to resolve their differences is to have them merge together completely as the catalyst does.

If you genuinely don't believe that, don't pick that ending - problem solved.

Great.  Where's my ending?

[M0keys]

Optimystic_X wrote...

humes spork wrote...
He's using a Prima guide as a source. That says something, right there.

You realize they get notes from Bioware before writing them, right? Or did you think they beat the game and printed all the walkthroughs within minutes of release?

And Prima didn't write the game files, last time I checked.
Sheesh, to think I was agreeing with you earlier.

Please point out these game files to me so I may better understand you mean.

Is there something that says and then Anderson harmlessly passed out?

[humes spork]

Sepharih wrote...

Fair enough, but I still think it's an underwhelming end to Shepard's character arc to have him just nod and be handled by the originator of the entire genocide.  Would have been more emotionally satisfying to spit in his face metaphorically.

It would have been but for the context of the scene. Otherwise, I agree.

You realize they get notes from Bioware before writing them, right? Or did you think they beat the game and printed all the walkthroughs within minutes of release?

And Prima didn't write the game files, last time I checked.
Sheesh, to think I was agreeing with you earlier. 

It's entirely possible to agree with someone overall but think they're completely out their ass on one individual point that has no bearing on the overall argument. Case in point, this one.

"Saved Anderson" is framed around the context that you save him...from TIM.

[CavScout]

The Night Mammoth wrote...

CavScout wrote...

Sepharih wrote...

Optimystic_X wrote...

Sepharih wrote...

Characters very often achieve things they initially do not believe are possible.  Often times it's part of their character arc.

Characters do, certainly. But the army has no character arc.

No, but Shepard does.  You might think it corny, but I would find it beautifully Cathartic and emotionally satisfying to witness an army and galaxy Shepard brought together achieve victory against all odds and disbelief.

They did and yet you hated it.

Maybe because it isn't a victory to him.

Shepard dies, Anderson dies, your crew is stranded, the Reapers are only destroyed in one ending, the Mass Relays blow up, the fleet is stranded, Earth is devestated without hope of reprieve. I fail to see where the sweetness is. 

Shep's goal is to stop the Reapers. Not to live happily ever after. He succeeds depending on what choices you make.

[CavScout]

Sepharih wrote...
I would prefer the fleet rather than the crucible, in spite of all proclamations of it being "impossible".

Also, I do not mind the "Crucible" as much as I mind the "catalyst".  The crucible is a lame plot device...but it doesn't contradict the entire themes of the series.

If they recut the ending to go like this:
 

and then added on the extended cut dlc for closure with the characters I would be satissfied.  The ending would still be underwhelming...but it'd be ok.

And I wanted to side with Sovereign in ME1 and take over the Citadel... they didn't give me that option. Why not? Where was the petulant demands to do whatever we wanted with our Shep back then?

[daecath]

I actually took the time to deconstruct all the logical fallacies in starbrat's argument in another forum post. I think I found 6 or 7 standard fallacies that apply to the starbrat's logic, and that was without even trying.

[PsyrenY]

CavScout wrote...

Shep's goal is to stop the Reapers. Not to live happily ever after. He succeeds depending on what choices you make.

Precisely.

humes spork wrote...

"Saved Anderson" is framed around the context that you save him...from TIM.

TIM was the reason you shot him; if he dies, you didn't really save him from TIM, now did you?

[CavScout]

daecath wrote...

I actually took the time to deconstruct all the logical fallacies in starbrat's argument in another forum post. I think I found 6 or 7 standard fallacies that apply to the starbrat's logic, and that was without even trying.

Curious: How many fallacies did you have to commit to get to them?

[CavScout]

Optimystic_X wrote...
TIM was the reason you shot him; if he dies, you didn't really save him from TIM, now did you?

The guides state you "save" Anderson with quotes. It really is you save him from the TIM execution, not that he is literally saved.

[Athla k4]

CavScout wrote...

Sepharih wrote...
I would prefer the fleet rather than the crucible, in spite of all proclamations of it being "impossible".

Also, I do not mind the "Crucible" as much as I mind the "catalyst".  The crucible is a lame plot device...but it doesn't contradict the entire themes of the series.

If they recut the ending to go like this:
 

and then added on the extended cut dlc for closure with the characters I would be satissfied.  The ending would still be underwhelming...but it'd be ok.

And I wanted to side with Sovereign in ME1 and take over the Citadel... they didn't give me that option. Why not? Where was the petulant demands to do whatever we wanted with our Shep back then?

That was the First of Three planned games, they were allowed leeway. This is the end, no more choices and the consequences are suppose to be unfolding, not building up and being almost entirely bypassed..

Modifié par Athla k4, 09 avril 2012 - 04:02 .

[RiouHotaru]

Basically, you and the Catalyst could argue in circles and you'd never get anywhere.

It's like arguing with Saren, or Balak. No matter how you try and present the situation, the opposition doesn't care, or argues back around to the same overal dilemma.

You COULD make the case about the geth, and the Catalyst would likely just go "It won't last." Shepard can't exactly prove otherwise, and the Catalyst has implied experience from other cycles.

Basically, BW didn't give you the option to argue with the Catalyst because it wouldn't have made any sense to. You'd still wind up back at the same place as before.

Modifié par RiouHotaru, 09 avril 2012 - 04:08 .

[CavScout]

Athla k4 wrote...

CavScout wrote...

Sepharih wrote...
I would prefer the fleet rather than the crucible, in spite of all proclamations of it being "impossible".

Also, I do not mind the "Crucible" as much as I mind the "catalyst".  The crucible is a lame plot device...but it doesn't contradict the entire themes of the series.

If they recut the ending to go like this:
 

and then added on the extended cut dlc for closure with the characters I would be satissfied.  The ending would still be underwhelming...but it'd be ok.

And I wanted to side with Sovereign in ME1 and take over the Citadel... they didn't give me that option. Why not? Where was the petulant demands to do whatever we wanted with our Shep back then?

That was the First of Three planned games, they were allowed leeway. This is the end, no more choices and the consequences are suppose to be unfolding, not building up and being almost entirely bypassed..

You missed the point. You've never been given freedoom to play your Shep anyway you wanted. You've always had to follow BW's rails with some minor pathing choices. ME3 had the same number, if not more, choices as ME1 and ME2 and the "outrage" simply wasnt there.

[hippanda]

Optimystic_X wrote...

humes spork wrote...

"Saved Anderson" is framed around the context that you save him...from TIM.

TIM was the reason you shot him; if he dies, you didn't really save him from TIM, now did you?

You don't prevent him from dying (happens in either case). When you "save him" (stop TIM from shooting him a 2nd time), you're given time to say your final goodbye to him. This allows Shepard to have some sense of closure with Anderson's departure. It strengthens his resolve. That's why Shepard himself is allowed to live at 4000 EMS if he "saves" Anderson instead of the normal 5000.

[PsyrenY]

Let's assume then that Anderson dies. (Still not convinced, .tlk/coalesced say save without quotes, but w/e.)

It's still a victory for Shepard. People are upset because the victory wasn't on their terms, but that's tough, the whole war isn't on Shepard's terms. You have to take the wins you can. The Weekes interview (and later, the EC) will show that nobody will starve and that either the relays can be rebuilt or we'll develop something new. Shepard can live, but even if you sacrifice yourself, you go out a legend and a hero to trillions.

A straightforward "and we install the big gun and shoot down the Reapers and win the galaxy" ending is quite simply boring and trite.

[Athla k4]

CavScout wrote...

Athla k4 wrote...

CavScout wrote...

Sepharih wrote...
I would prefer the fleet rather than the crucible, in spite of all proclamations of it being "impossible".

Also, I do not mind the "Crucible" as much as I mind the "catalyst".  The crucible is a lame plot device...but it doesn't contradict the entire themes of the series.

If they recut the ending to go like this:
 

and then added on the extended cut dlc for closure with the characters I would be satissfied.  The ending would still be underwhelming...but it'd be ok.

And I wanted to side with Sovereign in ME1 and take over the Citadel... they didn't give me that option. Why not? Where was the petulant demands to do whatever we wanted with our Shep back then?

That was the First of Three planned games, they were allowed leeway. This is the end, no more choices and the consequences are suppose to be unfolding, not building up and being almost entirely bypassed..

You missed the point. You've never been given freedoom to play your Shep anyway you wanted. You've always had to follow BW's rails with some minor pathing choices. ME3 had the same number, if not more, choices as ME1 and ME2 and the "outrage" simply wasnt there.

ok, never mind what I personaly was expecting to happen. We were still told late in development that there would be many endings. around 16 and it would not be reduced down to a,b,c. That the endings would be a result of your choices.
They raised expectations too high, and now people are ticked.

Modifié par Athla k4, 09 avril 2012 - 04:29 .

[Byronic-Knight]

Optimystic_X wrote...

Byronic-Knight wrote...

I wasn't even talking about the Catalyst's options. . . I presented a fourth. 

Your response to that fourth option? That it's impossible to win---only because all the fallible mortals know they are fighting losing odds. I don't disagree they are fighting losing odds, I only recognise this isn't the first or only time you have faced losing odds and truimphed, this isn't the first time you've proven the nay-sayers wrong, and that Shepard has recognised this very simple fact in past scenes, and has used it as a rallying cry---either to his squad or to himself, to strengthen his resolve. 

So, instead of even attempt to prove the doubters wrong again, you simply surrender any sort of confidence you had in the lead up to that last moment and give in to the voices in your head telling you it's impossible, even though the people to whom those voices belong are, at that very moment, fighting with the threat that has been looming since the first game, willing to die if it meant the person next to them could deal the leathal wound. 

And defeating the Reapers through military strength wouldn't serve to downplay their power---all one would have to do is look at Palaven, Thessia, or Earth to understand just how monumentally destructive they are---it would only prove that they aren't Gods. 

People are willing to die, sure, but not for a hopeless cause.

I'm glad you brought up Thessia. Remember when you landed, and the Asari commandos were on the verge of pulling out? Until you told them about the temple artifact, and how it would give you a chance to finish the Crucible and win the war. And all of a sudden they not only stayed, but sacrificed their last gunships to clear a path for you to get to that temple.

That's how you motivate people to give it their all - not by waving your d*ck at the Reapers and proving your manliness to them, but by actually taking the chance that has a shot of winning. And if saving all those people means picking a color, you'd better believe that's what my Shepard will do, whatever s/he thinks of the Catalyst personally.

And that is fine with me, but my Shepard would refuse to play into the Catalyst's "This is the way it has to be, so choose" speil and allow the force I spent the previous forty hours amassing "kick the Reapers back into whatever black hole they crawled out of"---to quote Garrus---or to die trying, both because I have issues with the choices presented---I feel controling the Reapers only serves to turn me into the Illusive Man; believing that all life should self-determinate, I feel unqualified to make a decision to re-write the DNA of every living creature in the galaxy; and I would not betray EDI and the Geth, especially after I worked so hard to make peace between them and the Quarians, who are potentially also screwed because I don't know if "killing all synthetics" includes their enviro-suits---and because I have more faith and/or confidence in the galaxy's ability to overcome the threat before them. 

The choices already present can be left in for all I care, along with the Catalyst. I only want the OPTION to take the course of action I have related to you. That's my point. That's the only change I want to the ending. I don't want a complete rewrite, where things are taken out to be replaced by something else, I want more choice(s) added to the ending, especially when the main mechanic in the series was making difficult choices, and making the choice to forgo the option presented as effectively ending the conflict immediately and instead allow the conflict to wage until one ultimately destroys the other is just as difficult as choosing "assuming control", making a decision on behalf of every living being in the galaxy to have their DNA (somehow) spliced with circuitry, or effectively severing the synthetic life-line (robots. . . off). 

And no, taking this course of action does not automatically mean that I get a happy ending where my Shep lives and there's a parade, and everything is all warm and fuzzy at the end---because, even if Shepard survives, the fact that so many had been lost over the course of the trilogy would make it bittersweet anyway (the only way to make it sunshine and rainbows is if I could resurrect Thane and Mordin and everyone else, and that would make the ending even more ridiculous)---Shep can still die. It would be a more solemn ending, but I would still be perfectly fine with it.

If you're interested, I've detailed the manner in which such a thing would play out on a number of threads, but for the most complete, wherein you will also find a separate link to dialogue: social.bioware.com/forum/1/topic/355/index/10492891/4#11151091 

Modifié par Byronic-Knight, 09 avril 2012 - 06:18 .