5087 réponses à ce sujet

[Oxspit]

SHARXTREME wrote...

@Oxspit

I get the DE ending. It would present some hard choices(although the very choice in cosmicism setting should mean less then nothing). MrFob's ending mod is also good.(even though he's using same setting.)
That's not the problem. Problem is that player doesn't see anything coming/It could be anything.
Main enemy and concern throughout the ME3 is Cerberus, player gets the feeling that if he can deal with the Cerberus; he can deal with the Reapers(biggest point for this is failed Thessia mission). Everything else(as a point of the story is afterthought)

About cosmicism and conventional or military victory(impossibility of, as you say). I just don't see how one single Shepard can tackle such non-odds, why he would be even remotely interested in tackling such non-odds.
That story is futile, it gets no point across, aside from futility and nihilism. AND the Reapers are not presented that way. They are maybe half that way and with inclusion of catalyst even that falls completely apart. The ending choices are validating the possibility, not impossibility of choices, but in the same time they are questioning Shepard's right to choose(by our moral and logic standards)
And (Shepard's) logic is based on knowledge. No knowledge - no logic. More knowledge - better logic.
That's the fault of the story. Shepard didn't obtained the knowledge required for adapting his logic so the story can survive such descent into futility.

I for myself didn't connect with Shepard in ME3 as much as in ME2. In ME3 focus from Shepard is shifted to bigger picture: uniting galaxy/defeating Reapers. So I cared more what happens in the bigger scheme then what happens in Shepard's micro-situation. But, Shepard is bound to his micro-situation while trying to solve bigger problem by his standards.
So, everybody is slipping into defeatism, not only in-game, but outside of the game as well. With Shepard that cheers them on to continue fighting.
Only way to correct that is to include different opinions and perspectives/voices in the ending. Somebody that knows/has opinion on the problem, not on the situation. Because situation is not the problem, Reapers are not the problem, they are degraded to the manifestation of the problem.
.
But what you're also missing by saying that conventional victory is not possible(or is futile to try) is a very important thing, our defining characteristic.
Even if you would see the Universe as always unknowable to us, or even if the universe is working in pre-deterministic or fatalistic standards, even then/especially then you must "play your role".
You must try to survive, win, learn, use what you have learned to live-on. Everything else is defeatism, a logical downfall.

You see, by saying that "conventional victory"(what does that even mean in SF?) is not possible because we basically don't know the rules of the game and we are insignificant(cosmicism), you're basically saying that your knowledge or logic is also not sufficient to make any kind of logical statement, as well as logic of those that say that conventional victory is possible. So it's a fallacy. You have no basis to conclude one way or another in cosmicism setting, and you're losing any ground to base your assumptions on.

Look, I think it's a little pointless arguing over an ending we didn't see and they never actively fleshed out.

I mean, I agree, it would have been difficult to write. Indeed, I rather think that's my whole point. It was too hard, they kept chopping and changing stuff and really just came across like they had no idea what they were doing by the end.

I think it could have been made to work in a way almost nothing else I've seen, though, and in any case the ending they came up with was so monumentally awful they really may as well have tried so as to be able to look us in the eye and say 'artistic integrity' with a straight face.

I agree, also, if the only point they manage to get across at the end was futility and nihilism, well, that's a bit of a failure - and a thematic collapse. I think they'd probably need to re-work those choices at least a little (the human reaper vs not human reaper one - I'm really not sure that could have worked), but the corner they've written themselves into was a tough one. That's precisiely why writing your way out of it would have been awesome.

It's obvious, though, that we're not dealing with a universe of pure cosmicism from the beginning, or ME1 would have ended very differently than it did. They have those two competing and contradictory ideas at the kernel of the story from the start, and the ending should have reached some kind of resolution between them, I think.

But I agree it would have been hard!

[3DandBeyond]

Oxspit wrote...

Conniving_Eagle wrote...



Prior, we are given the sense of "Our cycle is different." The Reapers' effectiveness at 'reaping' comes not from their firepower or military capabilities, it comes from their patience and ruthless calculus. In the previous cycles, the Reapers would pour through the Citadel, killing the galaxy's leaders and obtaining all the necessary information on advanced organic life. More importantly, they gain total control of the Mass Relays. The Reapers then proceed shut down all the relays, only opening one at a time to systematically wipe out its respective local civilization(s). This is what Sovereign meant when it said "We are legion. Our numbers will darken the skies of every world." Sovereign didn't mean this would occur simultaneously, they don't have the numbers for that. The Reapers' success is the result of cutting off a system's communication, then swarming it, planet by planet.

Well, you know what really is bad writing? Reliance on some vague 'our cycle is different' idea.

That said, yes, our cycle is shown (rather than just vaguely stated) to be different in one crucial respect: In the sheer, blind luck of coming directlly after the Protheans. They really are shown to be special. They are literally the first cycle to master the citadel enough to sabotage the keepers without the reapers knolwedge - you have to believe they are the first, or Sovereign's actions make no sense at all. They also learn enough about the citadel to be able to sabotage reaper control after the fact.

Our advantage, then, is time. Not much, though, as it happens. ME2 represented a clear decision to make sure that advantage is destroyed, however. Indications are that, with the human reaper, they'd decided to go down some 'our cycle is special because, well, humans are special' angle instead. By ME3, they seem to have changed their mind again and decided, no, 'our cycle is special because, like, democracy or something'. Each an indication of their focussing on the chapter as a stand-alone game and to hell with the overall story.

I would have rather seen us actually earn the advantage we were given than seeing us commit a new act of special pleading each time, myself.

As to the second part, no they don't rely on overwhelming military superiority, but they still have it. You could actually make them militarily equivalent to us and only give them their longer experience and indoctrination (christ that's a powerful advantage), and it's still their war to lose.


Positing an enemy with overwhelming advantages over you isn't bad writing. Positing that and then contradicting yourself when it becomes inconvenient as you've written yourself into a corner: that's bad writing.
s

It's the creation of a contrivance of the crucible rather than using unconventional methods and innovative thinking to say that some had prepared for the reapers.  Don't get hung up on the word "conventional" as others are.  What the writers did was put themselves into a corner where they needed the crucible and the kid instead of creating other means.  Consider this-why not show the Cerberus is preparing and have forces (Shepard) attempt to persuade TIM to work with the galaxy for self-preservation.  Perhaps he even has more advanced things based on oh, I don't know the collector base if you saved it (or the Alliance does from the info Shepard downloaded from it that is never used in ME3).  If TIM refuses to help then it gives a real reason other than Cerberus husks to try and fight them and gain their tech or equipment/real assets.  Or what if you are given the option to even have some infiltrate Cerberus and gain tech. 

There were other things all over the place in the codex.  Mercenaries that were building some powerful weapons on some out of the way planet.  All they had to do was make more of the war asset quest be for some newly gained assets or even getting some to innovate.  If you can insert a totally unknown crucible then why not create a situation where some people had been working behind the scenes to actually prepare?  How about all those people Shepard met and helped in ME1 and 2?  How about the geth?  The geth knew about the reapers and they just sat around comparing tatoos or what?  Sure, they had to worry about the Quarians.  But what about the data Shepard had and EDI had-everyone just ignored all that?  ME3 just makes everyone look like the stupidest bunch of fools ever.

In ME1 Anderson helps Shepard leave to go fight.  But in ME3 Anderson and Hackett both believe the reapers are coming and do nothing.  In ME1 Anderson didn't worry about dying.  In ME3 he does nothing even though he has seen a reaper.  He knows Shepard is telling the truth.

[MrFob]

Oxspit wrote...

Well, you know what really is bad writing? Reliance on some vague 'our cycle is different' idea.

That said, yes, our cycle is shown (rather than just vaguely stated) to be different in one crucial respect: In the sheer, blind luck of coming directlly after the Protheans. They really are shown to be special. They are literally the first cycle to master the citadel enough to sabotage the keepers without the reapers knolwedge - you have to believe they are the first, or Sovereign's actions make no sense at all. They also learn enough about the citadel to be able to sabotage reaper control after the fact.

Our advantage, then, is time. Not much, though, as it happens. ME2 represented a clear decision to make sure that advantage is destroyed, however. Indications are that, with the human reaper, they'd decided to go down some 'our cycle is special because, well, humans are special' angle instead. By ME3, they seem to have changed their mind again and decided, no, 'our cycle is special because, like, democracy or something'. Each an indication of their focussing on the chapter as a stand-alone game and to hell with the overall story.

I would have rather seen us actually earn the advantage we were given than seeing us commit a new act of special pleading each time, myself.

As to the second part, no they don't rely on overwhelming military superiority, but they still have it. You could actually make them militarily equivalent to us and only give them their longer experience and indoctrination (christ that's a powerful advantage), and it's still their war to lose.


Positing an enemy with overwhelming advantages over you isn't bad writing. Positing that and then contradicting yourself when it becomes inconvenient as you've written yourself into a corner: that's bad writing.
s

I have to agree on all points. IMO the disconnectivity between the distinct chapters is the single most derogatory aspect of the ME storyline, That doesn't just include the reapers. It includes Cerberus, the council, the boundaries of FTL travel but even small things like the blood pack, etc. The small things don't matter to me, you find those in any fictional universe but if the main themes and plot points are not consistent, you loose a lot of credibility and thus immersion. And while I like each chapter immensly, I think they did drop the ball on that one.


As for the DE ending, it's not perfect but it would have fit the situation better. I tried to implement it in the last 10 minutes and it is too short a time to do it. In my opinion it still fits better into the plot than the original one (which also tries to re-contextualize a concept in 10 minutes and is not really succeeding there either).

Modifié par MrFob, 01 août 2012 - 04:06 .

[Oxspit]

@3DandBeyond

If you want an argument over whether the crucible and the catalyst are contrived, you're obviously not going to get one from me. They totally, totally were.

My position is that by the time we've walked into ME3 as we've been left it after ME2 you just don't get a victory that's not contrived. Widespread galactic innovation and awesomeness included.

What does that say about those thousands of other cycles before us, some of whom beaten when the reapers were younger and less numerous, and when those civilisations themselves where far more comparatively advanced than us?

It says that we're just more awesome and smart. Like, just because. And more awesome and smart than those reaper chumps, who we just clevered out of an overwhelming military advantage in literally every respect you can think of. We got them to squander the biggest starting advantage ever just by being awesome and clever. Never mind that there's literally nothing we can build militarily that they can't too. Hell, they can just park a single reaper over an installation long enough and it just becomes theirs by virtue of indoctrination. They can actually get us to do the thinking for them if they want to.

I think that's contrived, too. Either it looks ridiculous now, or it makes the fundamental premiss of the universe look contrived and unbelievable if they actually manage to pull it off convincingly.

Added to which this has to work within the confines of a game. You have to have done something so significant at the end that the scale has tipped decisively one way or the other.

I just do not think you can just change the ending and make this story good. In a way, I actually feel sorry for the writers who were left when the music stopped, because it really wasn't just their fault.

[3DandBeyond]

Oxspit wrote...

@3DandBeyond

If you want an argument over whether the crucible and the catalyst are contrived, you're obviously not going to get one from me. They totally, totally were.

My position is that by the time we've walked into ME3 as we've been left it after ME2 you just don't get a victory that's not contrived. Widespread galactic innovation and awesomeness included.

What does that say about those thousands of other cycles before us, some of whom beaten when the reapers were younger and less numerous, and when those civilisations themselves where far more comparatively advanced than us?

It says that we're just more awesome and smart. Like, just because. And more awesome and smart than those reaper chumps, who we just clevered out of an overwhelming military advantage in literally every respect you can think of. We got them to squander the biggest starting advantage ever just by being awesome and clever. Never mind that there's literally nothing we can build militarily that they can't too. Hell, they can just park a single reaper over an installation long enough and it just becomes theirs by virtue of indoctrination. They can actually get us to do the thinking for them if they want to.

I think that's contrived, too. Either it looks ridiculous now, or it makes the fundamental premiss of the universe look contrived and unbelievable if they actually manage to pull it off convincingly.

Added to which this has to work within the confines of a game. You have to have done something so significant at the end that the scale has tipped decisively one way or the other.

I just do not think you can just change the ending and make this story good. In a way, I actually feel sorry for the writers who were left when the music stopped, because it really wasn't just their fault.

Maybe so, but I don't mind contrived if it fits within the context of the known setting of the story that came before.  In order for me to buy into the star kid, I needed to have the undenial inkling that someone somewhere was calling all the shots for the reapers.  In order for me to buy into the crucible I needed for someone, anyone to debate the need or desire for it-no one does.  It's like all these robots lined up and said, "yay, crucible."  They don't know what it will do, but give someone a thanix cannon and they do know what it will do.  They even can see its limitations. 

Much of ME is contrived, but it works because people discuss what things do and overcome the suspension of disbelief.  In ME3 they all left their brains in the refrigerator and got to work, devoting everything to the crucible.  That defies logic.  If just one person had objected or if just one person had said they understood what the crucible would do, it would make some sense.  I mean, they can say it produces power, but if you are making a gun, you clearly know what will cause the internal explosion and what that will affect.  It causes a projectile to pop out the business end of the gun.  All they can say about the crucible is it's capable of creating unquantifiable levels of energy.  Ok, then what?  Does it shoot out the end?  Then what?  For all they know it's a huge destroy-the-galaxy gun, or a huge bomb.

Give me a contrivance that says Salarian STG just developed new stealth tech that can be easily installed on all Dreadnoughts with little modification.  Or that Mordin after examining the data gotten from the collectors and their base and on the human reaper has determined a weak point in the shielding and armor of the reapers.  That maybe some new type of weapon has been created that sends out burrowing particles that can get beneath kinetic barriers and destroy the organic part of the construct.  Like the thing TIM wanted to set off in the collector base.

[Ghurshog]

I am totally willing to check my disbelief at the door when enjoying Science Fiction/Fantasy as long as the story presented is internally consistent.

This is the bargain I make with story tellers, I hat check my disbelief and you tell me a consistent story.

Its easy to understand not so easy to do over a trilogy with mulitple branch story points.

[3DandBeyond]

Ghurshog wrote...

I am totally willing to check my disbelief at the door when enjoying Science Fiction/Fantasy as long as the story presented is internally consistent.

This is the bargain I make with story tellers, I hat check my disbelief and you tell me a consistent story.

Its easy to understand not so easy to do over a trilogy with mulitple branch story points.

The one thing is devs do keep lore bibles and have the games and even fans they could consult.  Fans are especially good at remembering everything. One BW dev said they did have a huge bible that the consulted--this was when ME3 was in development--to keep the story straight.  What they did though wasn't some forgivable little departure from minor lore from ME1.  They actually rewrote or ignored major points that exist within ME3 itself.  And that's along with major points of ME1 and 2--heck, most of ME2 was totally ignored.

Consider in ME1, the major point is getting Saren and then learning he wants to set off a signal to call in the reapers.  Where's the kid when this is happening?  I must guess where he is because there's no hint of him at all.  And where was he when the Protheans shut off the signal?  What was the meaning of the conversation with Sovereign--the first reaper we are aware of?  He was either lying or deluded if the kid is to be believed.  The kid renders Sovereign down into an almost laughable character or pitiable (if he weren't so disgusting).  In fact all reapers are turned into neutered lap dogs.  That's a major shift.

And actually with ME3 the multiple branch story points are mostly meaningless.  You don't need to play ME1 or 2 at all.  And you don't even need to play a lot of ME3.  You could play multiplayer and promote classes and get enough EMS for this.  So, all you have to do is play the parts of the game that move the story forward-to get to Earth and the citadel. 

You don't need to get all those other assets.  And the only impact making most of the other decisions in the game (genophage cure, geth/quarians, and so on) will have is on the slideshow you will get.  If you didn't cure the genophage, there's no krogan baby, and so on.  The other thing is paragon and renegade-which can affect the narration you will get.

The decision tree stops after TIM for the most part.  And up pop 3 artificial choices.

[GodSentinelOmega]

At alleyed. I really like that Paradox Event ending for ME3.

Forgive for mixing metaphors a bit here but i think the old adage 'the road to Hell is paved with Good Intentions' fits ME3 very well sadly.

Throughout the game you get to find the best way through. On Tuchanka, on Rannoch, on Sanctuary, and On the side missions where you save people or take out Cerberus operations.

But despite all the good choices and the building alliances. The united friends and good intentions of Shepard, we still end up with Beelzelyst and his 3 degrees of damnation. He miht as well have said:

Welcome to Pandemonium puppetboy, now dance on my strings and choose the colour of your hellfire.

Also, the five stages of grief at impending death (via the simpsons joke) apply to the game too.

1: Denial
The speech to the fleet before the final battle. We will prevail!
2: Anger
The fight from landing on earth to Andersons FOB base.
3: Fear
All the final goodbye conversations, followed by the fight to the beam and beam run. Its constantly stated and to be getting more desperate as more of your allies are wiped out. Followed by your hobble to the beam and walk down Citadel corpse road.
4: Bargaining
Your conversations with TIM and glowstick.
5: Acceptance
The choices are laid and shepard just shrugs and walks off to die.

The fact that both analagies can fit the game i think shows how far Bioware let the ME saga fall at the end. Far from the great tale of a man/woman standing in defiance of gods and monsters with his friends and allies united, this tale turned into Faust with glowstick playing the part of the devil with his double-edged deals.

Modifié par GodSentinelOmega, 01 août 2012 - 10:39 .

[Oxspit]

@3DandBeyond

I really don't think any major events in the plot of ME1 were particularly contrived, actually. None that I can remember anyway (I mean a few incidental side-stories may have been, but I wouldn't remember all of those). Well, except I suppose in the sense that everything is, you know, made up. But if that's our standard all stories are trivially contrived. I just don't recall any elements which did not fit with the story provided thus far which seemed invented because the writer(s) had found themselves in a hole they couldn't think of any other way to write themselves out of, and which felt subsequently forced and jarring in some way. Like the crucible and the catalyst were ... and like I would have found a straightforward victory for our cycle to be too, for the reasons I've stated.

I guess I'm just not really that interested in having the 'what brand of
bad writing would you have preferred to see at the end?' conversation which, in lieu of you actually explaining how you can make sense of the problems I have with a straightforward victory, is essentially the conversation we seem to be having.

We're going, I think, to have to agree to differ. Less because I violently disagree that a straight-up victory would have been better, but because I really don't care very much - I think it would have been pretty bad too. I have a very hard time believing that's where they were going with the original story.

I guess I'm a lot more interested in the question of why ME3 ended up such a mess, and what implications this has for others trying to do the same thing that Bioware started (maintain an entire franchise of solid writing rather than just single games). I wouldn't have cared so much if this were a series of books or movies. Plenty of those end terribly, but you can console yourself with the great ones that have existed and will exist again. I'm not so sure you can here.

[3DandBeyond]

Oxspit wrote...

@3DandBeyond

I really don't think any major events in the plot of ME1 were particularly contrived, actually. None that I can remember anyway (I mean a few incidental side-stories may have been, but I wouldn't remember all of those). Well, except I suppose in the sense that everything is, you know, made up. But if that's our standard all stories are trivially contrived. I just don't recall any elements which did not fit with the story provided thus far which seemed invented because the writer(s) had found themselves in a hole they couldn't think of any other way to write themselves out of, and which felt subsequently forced and jarring in some way. Like the crucible and the catalyst were ... and like I would have found a straightforward victory for our cycle to be too, for the reasons I've stated.

I guess I'm just not really that interested in having the 'what brand of
bad writing would you have preferred to see at the end?' conversation which, in lieu of you actually explaining how you can make sense of the problems I have with a straightforward victory, is essentially the conversation we seem to be having.

We're going, I think, to have to agree to differ. Less because I violently disagree that a straight-up victory would have been better, but because I really don't care very much - I think it would have been pretty bad too. I have a very hard time believing that's where they were going with the original story.

I guess I'm a lot more interested in the question of why ME3 ended up such a mess, and what implications this has for others trying to do the same thing that Bioware started (maintain an entire franchise of solid writing rather than just single games). I wouldn't have cared so much if this were a series of books or movies. Plenty of those end terribly, but you can console yourself with the great ones that have existed and will exist again. I'm not so sure you can here.

Don't get me wrong.  I don't like the idea of substituting bad writing for bad writing.  Merely stating that I'd rather have a contrivance that at least leads to something that fits with the story at hand than one that veers off into fantasy land and ignores what the stories told before.

The only way to have gotten rid of the whole thing would have been to make an actual story, rather than plop in some fetch quests and much of the mess started right at the beginning.  Anderson risked his life in getting Shepard off of the citadel in ME1 in facing the threat there, but Anderson and Hackett, surely had to have had data from the collector's base, from EDI, from everyone, and they believed Shepard, and they did nothing from the end of ME2 to the beginning of ME3.  They are the most inept military leaders of all time. 

I in no way am saying that contrivances are great things and that I'd like that at all.  I would just choose one over another especially given what we got.

I think I can give you some speculation as to why it became this kind of mess-take it for what you will.  It's one writer's influence.  Mac Walters wrote the Arrival.  That's his view of things-the impossible mission and genocide, no choice, no way out.  That's art.  It also was the model for what would happen with destroyed relays in ME3.  In Feb Walters said the galaxy would end up a wasteland.  There's a codex, Desperate Measures that says a ruptured relay would ruin terrestrial worlds in a system.  And the relays are destroyed in the original endings.  A wasteland.  But people hated this and it made no sense.  Shepard is dead and controls reapers in a destroyed galaxy?  Or the galaxy is just destroyed and people will starve?

His vision seemed to be to set it up as a no win, just like the Arrival.  However, he also ignored other codex entries and anything (other planets where obvious earlier fighting had taken place) and even ignored the Rachni.  The Rachni were around at the time of the Protheans and were advanced to become warriors.  They also have ancestral/genetic memory.  What might they know?  Why was any of that important?  Just so much wasted potential.

The crucible was supposed to be a dark energy weapon-could manipulate mass effect fields and lower the mass of reapers thus weakening their shields.

I think it's the disconnect between writers-they took on new writers to write sections.  So someone wrote Tuchanka and the Geth/Quarian thing and everyone wanted to write a good story, but no one was looking to make sure it all fit at the end.  Or that it all fit with the other games.  Wasted potential.

[Oxspit]

I'm not entirely convinced Mac just doesn't make for an easy scape-goat, really.

I mean, even if he is the cheif reason for the crappy story-line there's the small problem of how it came to be that any one person could do that kind of damage to a franchise they didn't own or start themselves.

And also... I'm not sure that explains ME2. I mean, I'm not necessarily knocking ME2 as a stand-alone story, but as a middle chapter relative to ME1? It's pretty hard to see what they're doing there. It really doesn't feel like a solid continuation of the same story. As far as I can tell, the whole thing was really starting to unravel there. They seemed to do a lot to the story for no other reason than focussing on making it work easily as a stand-alone game.

It seems to me that there's a culture in Bioware and/or which just sees the writing as just not that important. Certainly not in terms of the long-term story.

Of course, the writing wasn't all bad.... I mean, Tuchanka was good. Tuchanka worked. Rannoch apparently did, too, but I find it a little harder to be fair to that mission for reasons that aren't likely to be the fault of whoever was in charge of that one.

And I wonder how the fallout is being interpreted and what it will mean for future endeavours all around. I think there are a lot of bad lessons they could choose to learn from this. There are good ones, too, but.......

[Eterna]

This thread is a giant glorified circle jerk.

[Oxspit]

So jerk with us, brother.

[3DandBeyond]

Oxspit wrote...

I'm not entirely convinced Mac just doesn't make for an easy scape-goat, really.

I mean, even if he is the cheif reason for the crappy story-line there's the small problem of how it came to be that any one person could do that kind of damage to a franchise they didn't own or start themselves.

snipped

Oh that's true.  He's been very vocal though.  Take the whole "wasteland" comment.  He said after ME3 the galaxy was a wasteland.  The game comes out and fans are aghast that the galaxy is destroyed, but it doesn't fit in with other things.  Shepard's torso-alive, for what?  Only to die since the galaxy is a wasteland?  With the EC, he and Hudson are appalled that anyone could have thought they meant for the galaxy to be in ruins.  He made himself a scapegoat.  Why not come out and say, "we goofed.  People clearly didn't like the galaxy being destroyed so we changed that."  Instead, it's like saying people were idiots for seeing what they saw, what it was supposed to mean.

As for ME2.  Well, part of that is also due to it being abandoned by ME3.  There were threads that were begun in ME2 that could have had relevance if they'd been explored and continued in ME3.  I have to fill in the blanks to figure out why the Collectors were obsessed with humans and Shepard.  I get that humans were considered the most advanced and that Shepard had opposed the reapers, but Shepard didn't single handedly defeat Sovereign and how'd they know who had been opposing them.  They could have gone after Shepard as the "leader", but how did they know that?  Are they psychic?  The Collectors were searching for human genetic mutations.  Why?  They planted the plague on Omega.  Why?

I could understand Shepard allying with Cerberus since no one else was doing anything, but given Cerberus' and TIM's connection to the Alliance (it was a black ops arm of the Alliance), I don't understand others not rebelling within the Alliance and working on getting ready to fight the reapers.

The major portion of the blame doesn't stem so much from ME1 to 2 as it does from 2-3, as I see it.  I understand if someone feels differently.  I saw the Collectors as an advance force, much like the heretic geth.  They were already in the galaxy through the Omega IV relay and the reapers had been delayed. 

And then you get the Arrival and the beginning of ME3 is incoherent when related to this.  You also are treated to Harbinger all throughout ME2 and his taunts of hurting you and so on and his final statement that you haven't won anything-they will find another way.  Well, we get to ME3 and see they don't need another way.  We can't beat the reapers, the collectors didn't matter at all, so I don't know what that was all about.  They never needed the geth, didn't need the collectors to soften up the galaxy.  All they ever had to do was get in and start harvesting.  You can't beat them anyway.

Last thought (maybe) I (don't really) promise.  What if genetic mutations were the key.  There's reasons Quarians never are made into reapers-their immune systems.  What if the idea of humans having immunity to the plague and the plague was really a Prothean idea that the collectors unknowingly were carrying out?  What if it was not something humans were immune to but really something they were carriers of as suspected.  The collectors knew the reapers were intrigued by humans so they knew they'd go after humans.  What if the crucible was meant to extract the plague pathogen from humans (in its mutated form) and dispersed it to destroy or weaken the reapers.  Humans are immune to it, but reapers have the organic material of other races within them.  The pathogen could infect the organic material within the reapers.  This is one thought.  Silly probably, but it's one way that ME2 could have been tied into ME3.  It also could have been something found within the collector base data and something Mordin extracted-he worked on the plague and he worked on collector remains and tech.

Modifié par 3DandBeyond, 02 août 2012 - 06:10 .

[SHARXTREME]

GodSentinelOmega wrote...

At alleyed. I really like that Paradox Event ending for ME3.

Forgive for mixing metaphors a bit here but i think the old adage 'the road to Hell is paved with Good Intentions' fits ME3 very well sadly.

Throughout the game you get to find the best way through. On Tuchanka, on Rannoch, on Sanctuary, and On the side missions where you save people or take out Cerberus operations.

But despite all the good choices and the building alliances. The united friends and good intentions of Shepard, we still end up with Beelzelyst and his 3 degrees of damnation. He miht as well have said:

Welcome to Pandemonium puppetboy, now dance on my strings and choose the colour of your hellfire.

Also, the five stages of grief at impending death (via the simpsons joke) apply to the game too.

1: Denial
The speech to the fleet before the final battle. We will prevail!
2: Anger
The fight from landing on earth to Andersons FOB base.
3: Fear
All the final goodbye conversations, followed by the fight to the beam and beam run. Its constantly stated and to be getting more desperate as more of your allies are wiped out. Followed by your hobble to the beam and walk down Citadel corpse road.
4: Bargaining
Your conversations with TIM and glowstick.
5: Acceptance
The choices are laid and shepard just shrugs and walks off to die.

The fact that both analagies can fit the game i think shows how far Bioware let the ME saga fall at the end. Far from the great tale of a man/woman standing in defiance of gods and monsters with his friends and allies united, this tale turned into Faust with glowstick playing the part of the devil with his double-edged deals.

Nice, bitter post. And a few very bitter humor points.
Now we can all jump straight to acceptance mode, until we see what Leviathan DLC will bring. It will be interesting to see what BW's opinion on our opinion is(!)

[GodSentinelOmega]

That wasn't how i wrote that post at all Sharxtreme. It was meant as tongue in cheek, not raving bitterness.

Yes i'm disappointed with they way ME ended sure. But i still love the series and i am intrigued by what the Leviathon dlc might be.

I was going for blackly comical, hence the simpsons reference. Guess i misjudged it a bit, sorry.

[SHARXTREME]

GodSentinelOmega wrote...

That wasn't how i wrote that post at all Sharxtreme. It was meant as tongue in cheek, not raving bitterness.

Yes i'm disappointed with they way ME ended sure. But i still love the series and i am intrigued by what the Leviathon dlc might be.

I was going for blackly comical, hence the simpsons reference. Guess i misjudged it a bit, sorry.

No. I understood the humor. But I also presumed(sensed) some bitternes, like from all our posts here.
After all, we are fans of the story, fans of: "What could have been" (I presume, again), bitterness only comes up from the parts we are not fans of.

I liked the part: "Welcome to the Pandomonium,  puppetboy. Now you may choose", but as much as I liked it, and laughed, it also showed me where our bitterness comes from.
It comes from acceptance. Forced acceptance. Not from realized or processed  acceptance.
The final "choices" are basically choices that make the Galaxy individually acceptable(no more and no less, exactly like that). Acceptable to individual Shepard.

Of course, there are those that find some choices even preferable, fitting or just acceptable  and some that find it inacceptable so that they must choose inaction to express that inacceptance.

Again, It's sad. Sad, that this kind of limitation can be imposed upon the palyer and the story with such, now past, potential. But it's also only a story(uninteresting fact). What's even more sad is that writers themselves can see their story as just a story and use that as argument against some disapointed fans?  
That speaks volumes and trilogies.

In this Leviathan DLC we will see what exact critiques from fans were innaceptable to Bioware and what exactly are fans are supposed to accept(now).  

I see "wasteland" brought up very often recently. Yes, that's exactly what's left. 
Now we can wait and see what facts will be added so we can adjust our logic to accept it. That ploted wasteland.

 

[GodSentinelOmega]

You have a real way with words Sharxtreme. Finding the heart of the problem in mass effect, along with fans grievances with. But saying it simply and calmly.

Rereading my post again, there probably is an undercurrent of bitterness towards what we end up with. Not a concious one, but something that is there nonetheless. Adding more ire to my words than intended.

Yes Forced Acceptance is the heart of it. Because i doubt that many (if any) fans could have imagined the kind of ending(s) we find. Just as I could never have imaginedthe way The Matrix ended.

Whether Mac and Casey truly deserve the full measure of disdain they are getting because of the fact that they and they alone allegedly wrote the ending(s) i don't know. The only way i can see that could have thought this was a good move is the way i looked at the Matrix. That the writers saw how fans were expecting or assuming it would end and decided to try and pull the rug from under them. Offering a twist conclusion that changes the world.

As we can attest by being here, the ME twist has backfired. Not for all because there are those who like the new ending, but for us ME ends on a much bleaker and less heroic note than it should have.

If that is making people jaded towards it then i accept i am one of them, but it does not dampen my enjoyment of the series as a whole.

Just the abrupt, leftfieled thematic shift in story that brought us all to this thread.

Modifié par GodSentinelOmega, 03 août 2012 - 07:33 .

[SHARXTREME]

@GodSentinelOmega

Thank you for your kind words.

This thread has stalled a little, it now is almost a real wasteland(very little is written lately here)

Anyway, I still check it out, to see if old partners in criticism have written something.

What came to me in thinking about synthetics, Catalyst contradictions and cosmicism is something that bothered me from the beggining. Catalyst statement: "Citadel is a part of me", which suggests that Catalyst can be (is) more then we see. Literally. (if it wasn't for other contradictions, this could pass as something bigger)
I wrote this in some other thread.  
 
t's simple how Citadel can be part of Catalyst.
Remember Geth and how each individual program(single geth) makes the Geth collective?
After Quarians destroyed Geth Dyson Sphere they killed a lot of Geth already stored there, so (according to Legion) Geth intelligence diminished and in pure survival mode they joined up with Reapers.

Now, how can Citadel be part of Catalyst.
Catalyst can be representation of the Reapers collective consciousness. ("One who is made of many" in contrast to Borg Queen who is just "One who is many") by the formula of: "sum greater then it's individual parts"(which can be exact definition of life and synthetics) .

For this to be true AND for Reapers to be independent/ or unaware of their dependency("each thought a nation") AND for Catalyst to control them("I control the Reapers") you must think of them as one entity made of many entities on different levels of existence.

On top of that, Citadel must be Reaper-like, a synthetic entity which is part of collective, so it's part of the Catalyst too.
There is no imperative for the Reapers to be aware of the Catalyst or Citadel-entity, they are just parts. Reapers, ironically, can be like organs in Catalyst organism. Sentient, but without ability to grasp the connection between them, sum of them. They just cannot comprehend that from their (inside) perspective.
Only outsiders(like Catalyst and Shepard) could comprehend that.


I know this is not really written-in the story, but it's the only explanation in which Catalyst doesn't contradict itself on that point. There+s one more thing that that can support that Reapers are just part of something bigger. Ending of ME2, where Harbinger says: "You have attention of those infinetely more greater  then you".Now, why would he speak so indirectly, as a middleman? 

So, to the ending choices and what would they mean if the Catalyst is not simply the "one who controls the Reapers", but rather the one who is made out of Reapers.
 In Control Shepard would not replace the Catalyst, but he would rather just control the Reapers. Without real impact on Catalyst.
In Synthesis(here's a bomb:) he would actually become Catalyst 2.0. Being made before  just from the Reapers, he would now, with Shepard's help, assimilate all organic species too. Catalyst evolution.
His secret would  be buried forever with Shepard, while all other species would lose the perspective to ever grasp their role, or "place" in that synthetic order.
Destroy is still riddled with contradictions(because of "Created will always rebel against creators" which is a lie), but it would destroy the Catalyst(by destroying it's parts, Reapers, Mass relay network, Citadel, Crucible even the Geth. Yes. in this scenario Geth are part of the Catalyst like the Reapers)i

Problem here is that for the Destroy to be viable, logical option and victory you must either:
a) not help the Geth on Rannoch/not care for synthetic life 
help Geth, but later accept Catalyst's thesis that synthetics are eternal enemy of organics and choose organics.

There are still too many plot holes here to consider such complex underlying story, which isn't really there(written).
I bothered to think about it, just because the authors obviously didn't. Shame I had to pay for the game and imagine my own ending.

[3DandBeyond]

I think given the announced release and even debate over Leviathan has really gutted the forums. IGN announced it would change the endings and then BW apparently got them to make a different announcement that says it doesn't. And on twitter comments about it were made to indicate it will only change dialogue from the kid-so he will explain more of what I never cared to have explained. They didn't learn the lesson of the EC I think. As well, Leviathan will supposedly add to war assets which lies at the heart of the problem.

Why add to war assets if it doesn't change anything? Why play DLC for a game if the outcome is the same and the outcome is by most estimations just OK with some and downright awful and disjointed to others? Why add war assets when those you currently have were of no use in the game? And if anything was to be done as far as war assets, why not add exposition for those you obtained and to the missions for finding them?

The basic sentiment on all of the Leviathan announcements on sites all over the web is that most aren't interested, even if they liked the ending enough. Most are saying they've moved on and recent sentiments of those from the company is if you don't like what they've done then there's the door.

They've never had an active open discussion here with fans but opened themselves up to other more open websites where I guess the criticism got extremely heated and destructive. Anyone with a couple brain cells synapsing together could have predicted that would happen. Open up discussion on open sources and you can't control how nasty it gets. But if you want to have a true discussion with those that bought your product and you want to get rid of those that are truly destructive you do it on a site you own. I don't mean censorship, I mean the ability to get rid of those that have been actively threatening. But others that remain on this site are beginning to say that BW was right in not talking to fans and they have implied if you complained you were a party to death threats BW received. This is the universe they have created.

We have had truly interesting, honest, and valid discussion here, prompted by one who could distill things down into words that expressed what we felt and still do feel. I want it to continue forever (though I'm realistic enough to know it won't). It has challenged my thinking. It is ironic to me that a game that failed so much has succeeded in creating something out of its failings-impressive discussion.

I almost feel like some of us will be the last ones out the door shutting off the light of rational thought-and I mean that rational thought coming from both sides of the argument. In this thread, by and large most discussion has been as to what was in the game and not ****** for tat attacks. ME3 was a game of contrasts-abandoned themes, abandoned characters, abandoned stories, abandoned heart. The controversy has created its own contrasts as well. It calls into question exactly what is and what isn't prone to rightful consumer complaint. But for me it also calls into question just what is intellectual property. People throw it around and are implicitly using it as a shield for what BW did here, but in doing so they are actively ignoring the use and abuse of the intellectual property of others that was utilized within this ending. At what point do we stop saying it's just fine for game devs to "borrow" heavily from other people's work? At what point do we decide and say that intellectual property should be applied to video games-more broadly than as a shield for awful stories or writing, that it should be used to say that the intellectual property, the art, the integrity of your work should be what is contained within your work and that it should be absent not the influence, but the obvious complete intent of someone else's work. I for one am unwilling to characterize any story or game as a dev's hands off intellectual property or art, if it is not originally their own.

ME3's ending fails thematically and does not fit this game, because it was never a part of this story. And it is off kilter, off base, and not art because it is not their art. The worst thing I ever heard among many is from Mac Walters when he said there'd be no change to the endings with the EC because they couldn't tell that story, it wasn't their story. Well, I'd believe that if only these endings were their story. They aren't and they aren't a part of ME's story. Fans say ME2 makes no sense. Well, it did before ME3. The blame, all of the blame lies within the story that comes after. You can't blame ME2 for not being connected to ME, because ME3 should have done that. You can't blame ME3 for the ending not making sense because the ending should have brought us back to the beginning, not just of ME3 or 2, but back to ME1. The ending of ME3 was why Shepard became a hero, why Shepard stood up and said we will fight and we will survive. And it was supposed to be more about why people decided to at long last work together-what the Volus wanted and the Elcor wanted-to be respected as people within the global community. They are ignored at the end as is everyone else.

A story forged in conflict, racing to some major cathartic, cataclysmic event with some big bang, ends in a whimper with a conversation. Well, if that was the vision for this then I truly believe they couldn't write any other ending because no one that thinks this was a good idea is really in touch with what these games were about. It was like instead of being given the climactic events of the game we were pushed right into an epilogue at the conduit and that's where the conversation and understanding of the reapers could have and should have taken place in this story as it was presented, in an epilogue.

[Book of Mazarbul]

Seriously people. The ending was a horrific disappointment, and as a humanities scholar myself, I would agree that "thematically repulsive" is perfectly accurate. The finale comprises a haphazard, morally repugnant set of arbitrary choices. But really, it sickens me to see new posts here every few minutes - it's not worth wasting hours, days, weeks of life on any more - can we please just give up and move on? The EC sucks, Mass Effect is forever just a Meh franchise. Play some Witcher 2. Watch Breaking Bad. Read Game of Thrones. There's better things out there!

[3DandBeyond]

Book of Mazarbul wrote...

Seriously people. The ending was a horrific disappointment, and as a humanities scholar myself, I would agree that "thematically repulsive" is perfectly accurate. The finale comprises a haphazard, morally repugnant set of arbitrary choices. But really, it sickens me to see new posts here every few minutes - it's not worth wasting hours, days, weeks of life on any more - can we please just give up and move on? The EC sucks, Mass Effect is forever just a Meh franchise. Play some Witcher 2. Watch Breaking Bad. Read Game of Thrones. There's better things out there!

You're implying this is all we are doing and that's not true.  Define wasting.  I just got done posting about the wonderful discussion we have had here that isn't just bashing the endings, but has really spanned a wide variety of subjects within the context of what the endings have in part violated or said.  We've discussed the meaning and value of life, self-determination, love, sacrifice, self-reliance, totalitariansim, and much, much more.  I consider Breaking Bad a waste of my time, but that doesn't mean it is for you.  I have been reading Game of Thrones, but found the series boring. 

I've seen scenes from the Witcher 2 and I much preferred the ability to make my own character (female) and the better romances within ME-the one romance if you can call it that that I saw in the Witcher 2 means it is a game better for those with a lot of testosterone in them-and it was really badly done.  I also prefer the setting because I love Sci Fi way more than the Witcher genre.  But, I know you don't mean this, there is also the implication there that people have all kinds of money to do other things. 

What some people, including BW don't understand is that for many people ME3 was their big entertainment purchase of the year.  Some people can't actually afford Satellite or cable tv or to buy book series or to buy other games.  They bought ME3 thinking it would be their entertainment.  They intended to repeatedly play through all the games to see what new endings they'd open up or just for the fun of seeing what effect it had on the ending they liked.  But, that's the key.  You can't do that if all the endings stink.  So, those people came here to ask for at least one nicer ending that they could at least be somewhat satisfied with.  For their troubles they got called names and at last were finally told by one BW employee that if they didn't like it they could leave.

And believe me, I know what I am talking about-I've talked with plenty of people that figured this was how they'd spend their summer and winter even until they had the money and were ready to buy something else.  You can't even get much money from trying to sell the game so people are stuck.

It doesn't mean we're stupid and think BW is going to change, but I've been lucky to talk with some very intelligent and thoughtful people-I've said it's ironic that a horrible game ending should have actually given me so much from people that both liked and didn't like it-the discussion.  That was never a waste of time.

Modifié par 3DandBeyond, 05 août 2012 - 06:35 .

[Book of Mazarbul]

3DandBeyond wrote... 
 I consider Breaking Bad a waste of my time

I've seen scenes from the Witcher 2 and I much preferred the ability to make my own character (female) and the better romances within ME-the one romance if you can call it that that I saw in the Witcher 2 means it is a game better for those with a lot of testosterone in them-and it was really badly done.  I also prefer the setting because I love Sci Fi way more than the Witcher genre.  But, I know you don't mean this, there is also the implication there that people have all kinds of money to do other things. 

If you prefer sci fi, that's perfectly fine - but I don't get the point of dwelling on it so much. I have a limited budget as well, and blew 80 bucks on ME3 only to be utterly betrayed. Yes, it's unfortunate for the people who only had this money to spend and now have no way to pass the time for the next year. But there is no reason to nurse the wound, picking a scab doesn't make it heal, it just makes the scar all the worse. It's over, it's done, and there are dozens of other movies, video games, books and television shows that are superior to Mass Effect in every way that you can experience affordably, or even for free. 

What some people, including BW don't understand is that for many people ME3 was their big entertainment purchase of the year.  Some people can't actually afford Satellite or cable tv or to buy book series or to buy other games.  They bought ME3 thinking it would be their entertainment.  They intended to repeatedly play through all the games to see what new endings they'd open up or just for the fun of seeing what effect it had on the ending they liked.  

It's terrible that the endings were so bad, but playing Mass Effect 3 as your only hobby for the next year is pretty pathetic however you slice it. Even if the endings were super varied and brilliant, it's seriously putting all your eggs in one basket - and everyone who did lost, badly. People are free to keep rationalizing it and wallowing in grief and reflection, but I still am baffled at everyone's inability to move on and let go. Mass Effect is not the meaning of life, it's a just another failed sci fi franchise now. No game is worth that amount of time, because life is just too short. There's more entertainment out there to be experienced - and these days (as aforementioned) nobody needs a tv subscription to watch the shows they want, and if you want free books hit up a library. 

[3DandBeyond]

Book of Mazarbul wrote...


If you prefer sci fi, that's perfectly fine - but I don't get the point of dwelling on it so much. I have a limited budget as well, and blew 80 bucks on ME3 only to be utterly betrayed. Yes, it's unfortunate for the people who only had this money to spend and now have no way to pass the time for the next year. But there is no reason to nurse the wound, picking a scab doesn't make it heal, it just makes the scar all the worse. It's over, it's done, and there are dozens of other movies, video games, books and television shows that are superior to Mass Effect in every way that you can experience affordably, or even for free. 


It's terrible that the endings were so bad, but playing Mass Effect 3 as your only hobby for the next year is pretty pathetic however you slice it. Even if the endings were super varied and brilliant, it's seriously putting all your eggs in one basket - and everyone who did lost, badly. People are free to keep rationalizing it and wallowing in grief and reflection, but I still am baffled at everyone's inability to move on and let go. Mass Effect is not the meaning of life, it's a just another failed sci fi franchise now. No game is worth that amount of time, because life is just too short. There's more entertainment out there to be experienced - and these days (as aforementioned) nobody needs a tv subscription to watch the shows they want, and if you want free books hit up a library. 

Well, you didn't read some of what I said-I've had great discussions with some great people that were based on the game but spanned a lot of things and consider the time better spent than just always watching tv (which I do).  At present I am writing a book (more than one).  I am also reading 2 others.  I have been swimming and visiting my nephew's new baby.  I've happened to meet some interesting people here and we will surely part ways, but much of it has been of value since exchanging ideas is doing something.

But you have to realize not everyone has even what you have.  I am doing fine and can afford enough.  But others don't have a library to go to or whatever.  But your whole premise is based on concluding that people have no lives other than here and that's not so.  I'm on here quite a lot, but when I'm not here I have very full days and I have in fact led a very full life.  This is not all I do and the presumption that it is is not too nice.  I know that I have and still do live life.  I've posted here but this isn't my life, it's one thing in it.  I also talk with people I know at the grocery store but that isn't my life either. Yes for some games are their main hobby-so what?

Modifié par 3DandBeyond, 05 août 2012 - 09:06 .