Aller au contenu

Photo

"All Were Thematically Revolting". My Lit Professor's take on the Endings. (UPDATED)


  • Veuillez vous connecter pour répondre
5087 réponses à ce sujet

#1301
KitaSaturnyne

KitaSaturnyne
  • Members
  • 396 messages

uwyz wrote...

I understand that if you choose destroy, the mass relays's destruction is logical and perhaps inevitable, because all reaper creations must also be destroyed. But if you chose synthesis, then you have already accepted the catalyst's very intrusive modification of all life forms - so why must the relays have to go as well? Whoever wrote the ending evidently don't care much about cultural exchange & diversity.


This reminds me of a series of messages on Twitter from BioWare that stated that it's entirely possible for those stuck in the Sol system to get home via FTL travel without the Mass Relays, rebuild the Mass Relays themselves, or upgrade their ships with Reaper technology to get themselves home. The thing is, these all raise major logistical issues.

Mass Relays link two points in space directly to each other, Mass Relay A and Mass Relay B. When you use A, you are taken directly to B without consideration for the expanse of space between these two points. For a ship to travel between clusters like that without Mass Relay technology would take decades, perhaps longer given the distance between stars. The reason is that you no longer have that instant transmissions between points A and B, you have to travel the entire distance between the two points. This would require that each ship be able to regularly discharge their FTL drive core (remember that FTL drives build up static charge over time that can potentially fry the crew).

The presence of fueling depots throughout the games indicates that all ships need to use these, it's not just unique to the Normandy. So there's a very high possibility that a ship could find itself in the predicament of having a FTL drive core that will microwave everyone on the ship if used, and having no fuel to manuever into a planet's orbit to discharge it.

It'd be like Star Trek: Voyager. They might get home eventually, but odds are against success to say the least.

Rebuilding the Mass Relays is an even bigger mess. While galactic technology is based on the mass effect principle, there has been no indication that any race in the galaxy knows what a Mass Relay is made of, let alone how to build one of their own. They can't even be scanned because they shield themselves down to the atomic level. In fact, it wasn't until six months before ME3 that we learned how to destroy one. So after the Crucible fires, all those millions (billions?) trapped in the Sol system have to research AND build their own Mass Relay technology with no reference point, because the original relays were destroyed. They wouldn't have long, since each fleet would have limited supplies and wouldn't be able to share them between each other.

So, it's either a matter of most likely dying on your way home, or rebuilding Mass Relay technology from the ground up within a few weeks with no blueprints.

The third suggestion from BioWare that I remember is the suggestion that the races would use tech from the dead Reapers to outfit themselves and go home. The first problem I find is that in two of the endings, the Reapers aren't dead. They just sort of pick up what they're doing and leave. The second is that it would likely result in a lot of infighting between the fleets. These alliances are still new and fragile, and would probably break down over a matter like this. They'd find a reason to fight over every matter that came up in regards to this. One species gets a Reaper tech weapon upgrade, so everyone wants one. But, everyone might not be able to get one because Sol is only one solar system and can't make enough for everybody. So, who gets these upgrades? Who gets to decide? Why does one person get to decide and not another? This is frought with peril to say the least.

I'd bring up the dangers of indoctrination, but the narrative in ME2 manages to send mixed signals on this one. Sovereign's destruction seems to indicate that when a Reaper is well and truly dead, its components are no longer able to indoctrinate those that come in contact with them. If they were, we wouldn't have been able to develop the Thanix Cannon. It's established that Reapers begin indoctrination by convincing the subject that their will is correct ("Wow, I never thought of it that way before!"); it would be counter-intuitive for a Reaper to tell someone "Obey our will, and turn our weapon technology against us". Counter to this though, the Arrival DLC tells us that even pieces of Reapers can indoctrinate those in contact with it. And again after that, we all assume that the Reaper IFF device would cause the indoctrination of those aboard the Normandy SR-2, but there's no indication in the narrative that that's happened at all. I'd point to James' "What's that hum" dialogue as a reference, but there's no indication that the Reaper IFF is still installed in the Normandy at that point, given how extensively the Alliance overhauled it.

The Destroy ending seems to indicate that the Reapers are thoroughly dead, so indoctrination might not be an issue as with Sovereign's death, but suspicion and paranoia would likely pervade any and all issues regarding using Reaper tech to upgrade their own ships. This would also go against the grain of the narrative if Shepard were to choose to destroy the Collector base.

Anything I missed? I'm doing my best here, but I really suck at this. :unsure:

#1302
Sable Phoenix

Sable Phoenix
  • Members
  • 1 564 messages

Hawk227 wrote...

I was a little annoyed that the control room was at the top of the (crumbling for no apparent reason) tower...


It was crumbling because a Reaper slammed the mother of all thresher maws into it.

#1303
Hawk227

Hawk227
  • Members
  • 474 messages

Sable Phoenix wrote...

Hawk227 wrote...

I was a little annoyed that the control room was at the top of the (crumbling for no apparent reason) tower...


It was crumbling because a Reaper slammed the mother of all thresher maws into it.


Well, okay... yeah. Guess I missed that the first 6 times I saw that scene.

#1304
Seijin8

Seijin8
  • Members
  • 339 messages
Regarding the Crucible, I believe what rubs people the wrong way is "oh, yeah, plans for the superweapon were on C:\\Documents and Settings\\Crucible\\Superweapon. We hadn't looked there yet..."

An alternate way of developing the Crucible plot device (using existing missions):

Liara (as Shadow Broker) receives reports of covert Reaper teams searching for something on multiple worlds, some of them long-dead. Their need for secrecy is a red flag. Why operate covertly at this stage of the invasion?

Liara also learns that Cerberus agents have been searching for data on these same movements. Cerberus squads have been sent to await and ambush Reaper forces to find what they are searching for. One communique hints that the Prothean archive may hold the answer.

Liara goes to Mars to seek the answers herself. She intuits that this would not be up-front scientific data (that is already being researched), and with her archaeologist's perspective, she seeks ancient myths. By the time Earth is invaded, she has discovered enough to get an idea of where to look next.

Mars mission: Eva attempts to steal the data, and when it is recovered, EDI and Liara determine that there was some sort of pre-Prothean artifact, from many cycles prior. Why chase this myth? Because the Reapers seem to be taking it seriously.

The N7 Missions activate as a race to discover what this object is, and to get it before either Cerberus or the Reapers do.

A three-way battle ensues once the object/data is located, and the Reapers call in their big ships to secure the artifact. With the Normandy's stealth systems, Shepard is able to get there first and fight through, escaping with the artifact/data archive. This parallel story arc would conclude between Palaven and Tuchanka, and from that point forward, the narrative would not change.

In this way, the Crucible is something earned, and not simply handed to us in the sloppy manner that took place. Liara is also validated as not just an excellent Shadow Broker, but a pivotal individual in her own right. It completes a character arc for her, bringing her early career back into play.

Just my take on an alternate presentation for the device. Thanks for reading.

#1305
KitaSaturnyne

KitaSaturnyne
  • Members
  • 396 messages
@Seijin8

Your last name wouldn't happen to be Karpyshyn, would it?

#1306
Hawk227

Hawk227
  • Members
  • 474 messages

Seijin8 wrote...

Regarding the Crucible, I believe what rubs people the wrong way is "oh, yeah, plans for the superweapon were on C://Documents and Settings/Crucible/Superweapon. We hadn't looked there yet..."

An alternate way of developing the Crucible plot device (using existing missions):

Liara (as Shadow Broker) receives reports of covert Reaper teams searching for something on multiple worlds, some of them long-dead. Their need for secrecy is a red flag. Why operate covertly at this stage of the invasion?

Liara also learns that Cerberus agents have been searching for data on these same movements. Cerberus squads have been sent to await and ambush Reaper forces to find what they are searching for. One communique hints that the Prothean archive may hold the answer.

Liara goes to Mars to seek the answers herself. She intuits that this would not be up-front scientific data (that is already being researched), and with her archaeologist's perspective, she seeks ancient myths. By the time Earth is invaded, she has discovered enough to get an idea of where to look next.

Mars mission: Eva attempts to steal the data, and when it is recovered, EDI and Liara determine that there was some sort of pre-Prothean artifact, from many cycles prior. Why chase this myth? Because the Reapers seem to be taking it seriously.

The N7 Missions activate as a race to discover what this object is, and to get it before either Cerberus or the Reapers do.

A three-way battle ensues once the object/data is located, and the Reapers call in their big ships to secure the artifact. With the Normandy's stealth systems, Shepard is able to get there first and fight through, escaping with the artifact/data archive. This parallel story arc would conclude between Palaven and Tuchanka, and from that point forward, the narrative would not change.

In this way, the Crucible is something earned, and not simply handed to us in the sloppy manner that took place. Liara is also validated as not just an excellent Shadow Broker, but a pivotal individual in her own right. It completes a character arc for her, bringing her early career back into play.

Just my take on an alternate presentation for the device. Thanks for reading.


That first line made me laugh out loud. I really like the rest of your proposal. It's a little depressing that people here are just spitballing alternatives and they're all way better than what we got.

Modifié par Hawk227, 03 mai 2012 - 05:45 .


#1307
uwyz

uwyz
  • Members
  • 51 messages

KitaSaturnyne wrote...

uwyz wrote...

I understand that if you choose destroy, the mass relays's destruction is logical and perhaps inevitable, because all reaper creations must also be destroyed. But if you chose synthesis, then you have already accepted the catalyst's very intrusive modification of all life forms - so why must the relays have to go as well? Whoever wrote the ending evidently don't care much about cultural exchange & diversity.


This reminds me of a series of messages on Twitter from BioWare that stated that it's entirely possible for those stuck in the Sol system to get home via FTL travel without the Mass Relays, rebuild the Mass Relays themselves, or upgrade their ships with Reaper technology to get themselves home. The thing is, these all raise major logistical issues.

Mass Relays link two points in space directly to each other, Mass Relay A and Mass Relay B. When you use A, you are taken directly to B without consideration for the expanse of space between these two points. For a ship to travel between clusters like that without Mass Relay technology would take decades, perhaps longer given the distance between stars. The reason is that you no longer have that instant transmissions between points A and B, you have to travel the entire distance between the two points. This would require that each ship be able to regularly discharge their FTL drive core (remember that FTL drives build up static charge over time that can potentially fry the crew).

The presence of fueling depots throughout the games indicates that all ships need to use these, it's not just unique to the Normandy. So there's a very high possibility that a ship could find itself in the predicament of having a FTL drive core that will microwave everyone on the ship if used, and having no fuel to manuever into a planet's orbit to discharge it.

It'd be like Star Trek: Voyager. They might get home eventually, but odds are against success to say the least.

Rebuilding the Mass Relays is an even bigger mess. While galactic technology is based on the mass effect principle, there has been no indication that any race in the galaxy knows what a Mass Relay is made of, let alone how to build one of their own. They can't even be scanned because they shield themselves down to the atomic level. In fact, it wasn't until six months before ME3 that we learned how to destroy one. So after the Crucible fires, all those millions (billions?) trapped in the Sol system have to research AND build their own Mass Relay technology with no reference point, because the original relays were destroyed. They wouldn't have long, since each fleet would have limited supplies and wouldn't be able to share them between each other.

So, it's either a matter of most likely dying on your way home, or rebuilding Mass Relay technology from the ground up within a few weeks with no blueprints.

The third suggestion from BioWare that I remember is the suggestion that the races would use tech from the dead Reapers to outfit themselves and go home. The first problem I find is that in two of the endings, the Reapers aren't dead. They just sort of pick up what they're doing and leave. The second is that it would likely result in a lot of infighting between the fleets. These alliances are still new and fragile, and would probably break down over a matter like this. They'd find a reason to fight over every matter that came up in regards to this. One species gets a Reaper tech weapon upgrade, so everyone wants one. But, everyone might not be able to get one because Sol is only one solar system and can't make enough for everybody. So, who gets these upgrades? Who gets to decide? Why does one person get to decide and not another? This is frought with peril to say the least.

I'd bring up the dangers of indoctrination, but the narrative in ME2 manages to send mixed signals on this one. Sovereign's destruction seems to indicate that when a Reaper is well and truly dead, its components are no longer able to indoctrinate those that come in contact with them. If they were, we wouldn't have been able to develop the Thanix Cannon. It's established that Reapers begin indoctrination by convincing the subject that their will is correct ("Wow, I never thought of it that way before!"); it would be counter-intuitive for a Reaper to tell someone "Obey our will, and turn our weapon technology against us". Counter to this though, the Arrival DLC tells us that even pieces of Reapers can indoctrinate those in contact with it. And again after that, we all assume that the Reaper IFF device would cause the indoctrination of those aboard the Normandy SR-2, but there's no indication in the narrative that that's happened at all. I'd point to James' "What's that hum" dialogue as a reference, but there's no indication that the Reaper IFF is still installed in the Normandy at that point, given how extensively the Alliance overhauled it.

The Destroy ending seems to indicate that the Reapers are thoroughly dead, so indoctrination might not be an issue as with Sovereign's death, but suspicion and paranoia would likely pervade any and all issues regarding using Reaper tech to upgrade their own ships. This would also go against the grain of the narrative if Shepard were to choose to destroy the Collector base.

Anything I missed? I'm doing my best here, but I really suck at this. :unsure:


I know that one staff member twitted that FTL is still possible, and that another stated that the relays can be rebuilt. But all these sounds more like backtracking and damage control more than anything else. The writer who produced the ending (probably a "management" figure) screwed up, now his underlings are cleaning up the mess. 

Regardless of how Bioware choose to fix this particular problem, their original intent does seem to be the complete destruction of the relay netmork. This to me is a very strong indication that the writers abandoned the series' embrace of multi-culturism in the ending.  Everyone will be stuck in their own homeworlds, and the cultural exchanges that enriched the Mass Effect universe, the enlightened inter-specie relationship (friendship, toleration, love, understanding, forgiveness, cooperation) that allowed the series to resonate so powerfully with its audience is taken away. I won't go so far as to say that such a future is not worth saving, but it seems to me that the cost of survival has been too great. Shepard didn't exactly sacrifce an ideal - he isn't given a choice to save the relays - but it seems to me that the writers rejected a central spirit/attraction of their creation and burned their own franchise.

#1308
KitaSaturnyne

KitaSaturnyne
  • Members
  • 396 messages

uwyz wrote...

I know that one staff member twitted that FTL is still possible, and that another stated that the relays can be rebuilt. But all these sounds more like backtracking and damage control more than anything else. The writer who produced the ending (probably a "management" figure) screwed up, now his underlings are cleaning up the mess. 

Regardless of how Bioware choose to fix this particular problem, their original intent does seem to be the complete destruction of the relay netmork. This to me is a very strong indication that the writers abandoned the series' embrace of multi-culturism in the ending.  Everyone will be stuck in their own homeworlds, and the cultural exchanges that enriched the Mass Effect universe, the enlightened inter-specie relationship (friendship, toleration, love, understanding, forgiveness, cooperation) that allowed the series to resonate so powerfully with its audience is taken away. I won't go so far as to say that such a future is not worth saving, but it seems to me that the cost of survival has been too great. Shepard didn't exactly sacrifce an ideal - he isn't given a choice to save the relays - but it seems to me that the writers rejected a central spirit/attraction of their creation and burned their own franchise


Yeah, that was one of the thoughts I had upon first completing the game. Without the relay network, all these races you've worked so hard to unite are now isolated from each other, which effectively invalidates everything you've just now done. How that can be considered satisfying to anyone is something I just can't comprehend on any level.

#1309
edisnooM

edisnooM
  • Members
  • 748 messages

Hawk227 wrote...

[snipped for size]

I hadn't played ME2 in months prior to ME3, so I glossed over this in my original ME3 playthrough. That said, it not only goes against what made the Geth interesting, but against what legion said they wanted anyway (The Dyson sphere, where they could share memories and commune together). Now you've gone and partially spoiled the rannoch arc for me. Thanks.


I'm not sure but was anything said that eliminated the possibility of continuing the Dyson sphere? The Geth still seem to be programs (going into Quarian suits), so they could concievably still communicate as before. I was under the impression that the upgrades merely increased the intelligence of a single program, to something like the level of Legion, and that this effectively overcame the drop in intelligence when programs were deactivated.

#1310
Seijin8

Seijin8
  • Members
  • 339 messages

KitaSaturnyne wrote...

@Seijin8

Your last name wouldn't happen to be Karpyshyn, would it?


Thanks for the compliment, but no. Is this similar to an idea he floated earlier?

@Hawk227: Thanks for the kind words. There's that old trope of lots of monkeys and typewriters. There are some exceptional minds posting on this thread, with far better ideas than mine. I guess my ultimate point is that much of the issues we "anti-enders" are having with the plot elements is in their presentation, and not always their substance (Synthesis being a hugely nonsensical exception).

@uwyz: Assuming the destruction of the relays is a necessary step for Mass Effect's sequels/spinoffs, It may be to create a more traditional exploratory theme, much like Star Trek. It does sucker punch the universe they created, though. I would have to see where they really wanted to go with this to propely critique, but I can't picture any storyline "plus" that beats the negative of tossing away an iconic element of the series. Unless it was just for shock value.

#1311
edisnooM

edisnooM
  • Members
  • 748 messages

KitaSaturnyne wrote...

uwyz wrote...

I understand that if you choose destroy, the mass relays's destruction is logical and perhaps inevitable, because all reaper creations must also be destroyed. But if you chose synthesis, then you have already accepted the catalyst's very intrusive modification of all life forms - so why must the relays have to go as well? Whoever wrote the ending evidently don't care much about cultural exchange & diversity.


This reminds me of a series of messages on Twitter from BioWare that stated that it's entirely possible for those stuck in the Sol system to get home via FTL travel without the Mass Relays, rebuild the Mass Relays themselves, or upgrade their ships with Reaper technology to get themselves home. The thing is, these all raise major logistical issues.

Mass Relays link two points in space directly to each other, Mass Relay A and Mass Relay B. When you use A, you are taken directly to B without consideration for the expanse of space between these two points. For a ship to travel between clusters like that without Mass Relay technology would take decades, perhaps longer given the distance between stars. The reason is that you no longer have that instant transmissions between points A and B, you have to travel the entire distance between the two points. This would require that each ship be able to regularly discharge their FTL drive core (remember that FTL drives build up static charge over time that can potentially fry the crew).

The presence of fueling depots throughout the games indicates that all ships need to use these, it's not just unique to the Normandy. So there's a very high possibility that a ship could find itself in the predicament of having a FTL drive core that will microwave everyone on the ship if used, and having no fuel to manuever into a planet's orbit to discharge it.

It'd be like Star Trek: Voyager. They might get home eventually, but odds are against success to say the least.

Rebuilding the Mass Relays is an even bigger mess. While galactic technology is based on the mass effect principle, there has been no indication that any race in the galaxy knows what a Mass Relay is made of, let alone how to build one of their own. They can't even be scanned because they shield themselves down to the atomic level. In fact, it wasn't until six months before ME3 that we learned how to destroy one. So after the Crucible fires, all those millions (billions?) trapped in the Sol system have to research AND build their own Mass Relay technology with no reference point, because the original relays were destroyed. They wouldn't have long, since each fleet would have limited supplies and wouldn't be able to share them between each other.

So, it's either a matter of most likely dying on your way home, or rebuilding Mass Relay technology from the ground up within a few weeks with no blueprints.

The third suggestion from BioWare that I remember is the suggestion that the races would use tech from the dead Reapers to outfit themselves and go home. The first problem I find is that in two of the endings, the Reapers aren't dead. They just sort of pick up what they're doing and leave. The second is that it would likely result in a lot of infighting between the fleets. These alliances are still new and fragile, and would probably break down over a matter like this. They'd find a reason to fight over every matter that came up in regards to this. One species gets a Reaper tech weapon upgrade, so everyone wants one. But, everyone might not be able to get one because Sol is only one solar system and can't make enough for everybody. So, who gets these upgrades? Who gets to decide? Why does one person get to decide and not another? This is frought with peril to say the least.

I'd bring up the dangers of indoctrination, but the narrative in ME2 manages to send mixed signals on this one. Sovereign's destruction seems to indicate that when a Reaper is well and truly dead, its components are no longer able to indoctrinate those that come in contact with them. If they were, we wouldn't have been able to develop the Thanix Cannon. It's established that Reapers begin indoctrination by convincing the subject that their will is correct ("Wow, I never thought of it that way before!"); it would be counter-intuitive for a Reaper to tell someone "Obey our will, and turn our weapon technology against us". Counter to this though, the Arrival DLC tells us that even pieces of Reapers can indoctrinate those in contact with it. And again after that, we all assume that the Reaper IFF device would cause the indoctrination of those aboard the Normandy SR-2, but there's no indication in the narrative that that's happened at all. I'd point to James' "What's that hum" dialogue as a reference, but there's no indication that the Reaper IFF is still installed in the Normandy at that point, given how extensively the Alliance overhauled it.

The Destroy ending seems to indicate that the Reapers are thoroughly dead, so indoctrination might not be an issue as with Sovereign's death, but suspicion and paranoia would likely pervade any and all issues regarding using Reaper tech to upgrade their own ships. This would also go against the grain of the narrative if Shepard were to choose to destroy the Collector base.

Anything I missed? I'm doing my best here, but I really suck at this. :unsure:


I know Patrick Weakes mentioned something about how without the crutch of the Mass Relays civilizations might be more likely to improve upon FTL capabilities.

Also I think you did a fine job.:)

Modifié par edisnooM, 03 mai 2012 - 06:11 .


#1312
edisnooM

edisnooM
  • Members
  • 748 messages

Seijin8 wrote...

Regarding the Crucible, I believe what rubs people the wrong way is "oh, yeah, plans for the superweapon were on C:Documents and SettingsCrucibleSuperweapon. We hadn't looked there yet..."

An alternate way of developing the Crucible plot device (using existing missions):

Liara (as Shadow Broker) receives reports of covert Reaper teams searching for something on multiple worlds, some of them long-dead. Their need for secrecy is a red flag. Why operate covertly at this stage of the invasion?

Liara also learns that Cerberus agents have been searching for data on these same movements. Cerberus squads have been sent to await and ambush Reaper forces to find what they are searching for. One communique hints that the Prothean archive may hold the answer.

Liara goes to Mars to seek the answers herself. She intuits that this would not be up-front scientific data (that is already being researched), and with her archaeologist's perspective, she seeks ancient myths. By the time Earth is invaded, she has discovered enough to get an idea of where to look next.

Mars mission: Eva attempts to steal the data, and when it is recovered, EDI and Liara determine that there was some sort of pre-Prothean artifact, from many cycles prior. Why chase this myth? Because the Reapers seem to be taking it seriously.

The N7 Missions activate as a race to discover what this object is, and to get it before either Cerberus or the Reapers do.

A three-way battle ensues once the object/data is located, and the Reapers call in their big ships to secure the artifact. With the Normandy's stealth systems, Shepard is able to get there first and fight through, escaping with the artifact/data archive. This parallel story arc would conclude between Palaven and Tuchanka, and from that point forward, the narrative would not change.

In this way, the Crucible is something earned, and not simply handed to us in the sloppy manner that took place. Liara is also validated as not just an excellent Shadow Broker, but a pivotal individual in her own right. It completes a character arc for her, bringing her early career back into play.

Just my take on an alternate presentation for the device. Thanks for reading.


That is a much more believable way of explaining the Crucible than the "Oh this old thing?" one we got.

Modifié par edisnooM, 03 mai 2012 - 06:14 .


#1313
richard_rider

richard_rider
  • Members
  • 450 messages
The crucible was way too convenient, wish it came down to EMS alone, and not a shoddy plot device.

Turians can't beat the reapers alone
Quarians can't beat the reapers alone
Asari can't beat the reapers alone
Volus can't beat the reapers alone
Krogan can't beat the reapers alone
Geth can't beat the reapers alone
Humans can't beat the reapers alone
Elcor can't beat the reapers alone
Terminus mercs can't beat the reapers alone

But together...

Would've been an epic battle...

Modifié par richard_rider, 03 mai 2012 - 06:19 .


#1314
KitaSaturnyne

KitaSaturnyne
  • Members
  • 396 messages

edisnooM wrote...

I know Patrick Weakes mentioned something about how without the crutch of the Mass Relays civilizations might be more likely to improve upon FTL capabilities.

Also I think you did a fine job.:)


Thanks, I appreciate it. I've been trying to improve my ability to articulate my thoughts effectively and with the right diction. I need critiques so I know what to fix and make better.

That said, I'd certainly be interested to see how FTL capabilities are improved. I wonder if it would be like the Akwende drive in Wing Commander?

Also, I'm sure you've heard this about six trillion times, but I love the Earthbound reference. :) Just had to say that before sleep claims me.

#1315
edisnooM

edisnooM
  • Members
  • 748 messages

KitaSaturnyne wrote...
Also, I'm sure you've heard this about six trillion times, but I love the Earthbound reference. :) Just had to say that before sleep claims me.


Thanks. :D 

Actually very few people seem to get it, or if they do haven't said anything.

#1316
delta_vee

delta_vee
  • Members
  • 393 messages
@Hawk227

I would say that is the most overtly dream-like part, but for me the following scenes were totally bizarre as well. The search for the console with Anderson in particular. He describes finding landmarks, as Shepard is finding them. Based on his descriptions of where he is, we should be able to see him run across the bridge and up the ramp. Then there is TIM controlling Shepard and Anderson, the magic elevator, and the ghostly presence of the catalyst, the sense of awe the music and lighting seemed to convey, and Shepard's inability to question the Catalyst at all. The same shepard that headbutted a krogan! (as Drayfish mentioned a while back). Maybe I was just feeling the conditioning of those fade to white seques.


The dissociative nature of the ending for those of us unconvinced of Indoc, is really what prompted the whole outrage (and the various critiques which have subsequently emerged). Given what we know of the development of the ending (how late it was in the dev cycle, etc), I'm quite willing to put chalk up most of these particular bits to the combination of rushed production, lack of proper planning, and heavy-handed stylistic choices.

This (bold) is my point. That Bioware thought that was necessary to make people consider the alternatives, it meant they saw the inherent failures in those alternatives. By including the Geth, they were twisting our (a huge chunk of the audience anyway) arms into considering what we were happy to discard. It seems bizarre to me that bioware would culminate the final installment of their magnum opus on what many (most?) people can agree was an obviously shallow and contrived decision. Each decision invalidates the (or an aspect of the ) journey in it's own way. We seem to agree this was forseeable. For them to do so anyway, and think it was fitting boggles my mind.


It boggles many a mind, for one reason or another. Not all, mind you, but plenty. And thus, here we are.

Indoc, to me, is fundamentally about faith. Faith in Bioware, faith in the legitimacy of the work, faith in the emotional and temporal investment made. Faith that expects to be rewarded eventually.

I'm...not much one for faith.

Well, yes. My definition of lose is the cycle continuing unabated. We were never really given an in-game reason to care about Earth. Incidentally, I think this was why the intro was what it was, witnessing the Reapers take Earth as you retreated to Mars and later the Citadel, helpless. It was a contrived means of investing the Player in the return to Earth later. Back to point, I didn't really see a reason to think the galaxy was incinerated as well. Well, beyond the exploding relays that apparently didn't supernova. I view the <1750EMS as a Pyrrhic victory. Earth is lost, but the galaxy is spared and free of the torment of the Reapers. As worst case scenarios go, that looks pretty nice.


On the intro, yes, I'd agree - it's a form of player conditioning, without the subtlety required for the player to commit. Many of the ludonarrative failures of the game can be traced back here.

On the option for loss, well, I suspect it's a matter of goalposting. I have two somewhat related perspectives on this:

1) Given the obvious attempt at foregrounding Earth in particular, I think as far as Bioware is concerned, a Pyrrhic victory on the galactic level is still a loss of Earth, and therefore a "loss" as far as they were willing to define it in gameplay terms. Like ME2's upgrades and loyalty missions, you really have to go out of your way to finish the main plotline with that few war assets. (Besides, "Reapers win" was uttered in the same set of breaths as "sixteen distinct endings", so take that with a plain of salt.)

2) Given the major choice and consequence mechanisms (CNC, in the parlance, apparently), ME's chief currency in forcing acceptance of loss in dialogue-wheel gameplay is time. Specifically, that major decisions carry previous state from far enough back in the series to deter save-scumming metagaming at major nodes. "Loss" is therefore defined as unsatisfactory character states. Gods know combat gameplay is exempt - fights can be replayed at will, and characters live through them regardless. Bioware has always encouraged relative completionism, so in that context "loss" is functionally equivalent to player apathy and/or reticence to play the game "properly". A true losing scenario, from BW's vantage, is a refusal to continue playing. Whether this is good design or bad, it's a deliberate stance.

I'm not sure what that would have looked like. More importantly, I think it would have undermined the experience. I keep harping on it, but IT is about the experience of being indoctrinated. You don't even realize it happened. Sovereign didn't turn to Saren and say "Haha, you're indoctrinated! Now fetch me some Geth" he allowed Saren to continue doing what he thought was necessary. By having the reveal in game (in the following scene perhaps) there is no uncertainty. There is no speculation. I also think "speculation" was a significant word. Not debate, not argument, not dissent, not critique, and not frothing nerdrage. Speculation. If everything is as it was presented, where does speculation fit in?


But there's an implied promise of narrative completion there - without it, as many before me have said, the game has no ending. The moment that (hypothetical) conclusion arrives, the narrative is literalized, and I'm not convinced the gap between the two serves any real ludonarrative purpose. (Certainly not this long a gap, anyways.)

I was a little annoyed that the control room was at the top of the (crumbling for no apparent reason) tower, but aside from that none of it really bothered me. It served the narrative (to me) and fit reasonably within the story. [...] The actual scene of Mordin going up was a little cheesy and contrived, a forced show of him finding catharsis. I can see it as visually manipulative, but not wholly illogical. [....] I've long seen ME for what it was, a space opera, filled with little contrivances. You put on your suspension of disbelief pants and roll with punches.


It was one more thing that screwed the narrative for me, but mostly in retrospect. Once the game was over, and once I could think about something other than just the ending, the idea of Mordin dying from Yet Another Plot Contrivance...rankled. And considering Tuchanka was the big standout, quality-wise (pretty much every other major sequence is lacking in comparision), it seems like an infection, touching even the healthiest.

Consider the manner in which you react to the ever-growing pile of coincidences when evaluating Indoc theory - I have a similar reaction to the cavalcade of unnecessary and couterproductive narrative decisions. They accumulate, and eventually there comes a point at which my suspension-of-belief pants have too many stains to wear in public.

You could probably bring up more that I'm forgetting, but the only ones that felt inexcusable to me were 1) Shepard twiddling his thumbs and getting fat on Earth between Arrival and ME3. [...] And 2) the guilt play with the child.


Here I'd add the entire Citadel coup mission, for reasons of believability and necessity. Knowing the intended placement to have been later in the game adds some context, but it doesn't help much. For that matter, it subverts the impact of the Citadel's later (entirely offscreen) capture and relocation. And it features Kai Leng, who is inexcusable on every level.

I chose Kaidan over Ashley because his powers were more useful. The way Bioware was so heavy-handed with his story arc was pretty annoying.


Speaking of the Citadel coup, it was yet another missed opportunity to have both Ashley and Kaidan react in different ways during the Udina scene.

I hadn't played ME2 in months prior to ME3, so I glossed over this in my original ME3 playthrough. That said, it not only goes against what made the Geth interesting, but against what legion said they wanted anyway (The Dyson sphere, where they could share memories and commune together). Now you've gone and partially spoiled the rannoch arc for me. Thanks.


Ah. Sorry.

That would be more elegant. Though I'm not sure how it would play out in game. A couple additional missions of clearing out Palaven and Thessia, before giving Harbinger the option to beat it? What would prevent him from regrouping and returning in force?


If Bioware were still insistent on retaining their focus on Earth, later campaigns on Palaven and Thessia could be left either for DLC or epilogues, frankly. You could retain the basic gist of bringing the united fleets to bear on the Reapers at Sol, but removing the Citadel relocation and associated Reaper concentration. If the timing is done properly, Earth can be structured as a surprise attack, with the Harbinger conversation/negotiation as the capstone (and final boss conversation).

Purely as an academic exercise, of course.

Modifié par delta_vee, 03 mai 2012 - 07:10 .


#1317
delta_vee

delta_vee
  • Members
  • 393 messages

edisnooM wrote...

I'm not sure but was anything said that eliminated the possibility of continuing the Dyson sphere? The Geth still seem to be programs (going into Quarian suits), so they could concievably still communicate as before. I was under the impression that the upgrades merely increased the intelligence of a single program, to something like the level of Legion, and that this effectively overcame the drop in intelligence when programs were deactivated.


They also added in a bunch of faff about "achieving true individuality" or somesuch. Rather undermined the scenario.

And with that, off to bed.

#1318
delta_vee

delta_vee
  • Members
  • 393 messages

Seijin8 wrote...

Regarding the Crucible, I believe what rubs people the wrong way is "oh, yeah, plans for the superweapon were on C:Documents and SettingsCrucibleSuperweapon. We hadn't looked there yet..."


I laughed. Pithy, and true to boot.

#1319
drayfish

drayfish
  • Members
  • 1 211 messages

Seijin8 wrote...

<a thoughtful and elegant narrative that responds to the needs of the fiction>


@ Seijin8:


I know I'm jumping in far too late, but lovely redraft of that means for aquiring that Prothean weapon device. Much more elegant staging of the action, and a fine way to earn the result. 

#1320
Seijin8

Seijin8
  • Members
  • 339 messages
@drayfish & delta_vee: Thanks for the kind words. I just hope the BioWare writers storyboarding for EC follow a similar theme. If the end-points are static, perhaps the narrative flow can be altered instead producing the same end-state, with a more palatable way of getting there.

To keep the thread semi-OP, I have been pondering the Control ending, and some points from earlier in this thread. Particularly, what level of control is "control"? Many people have talked about flying the Reapers into convenient stellar furnaces, but would the "independent nations" of the Reapers accept this fate? Is the control total?

The only two Reapers that we ever "get to know" are Sovereign and Harbinger. Their views differ substantially. Even knowing what the Reapers are ultimately about, it doesn't seem that Sovereign was really on board with the concept. Sov seemed to take every microbe spared for the next cycle as a personal insult. Harbinger appeared to really believe Reaperfication was a beneficial step for humanity.

The Reaper on Rannoch says something to the effect that "Harbinger spoke of you". This may indicate Harbinger is the leader of the Reapers (or a general or somesuch), but it could as easily signal that no other Reapers of significance thought Shepard was worthy of discussion.

In that event, is Harbinger more like a cult leader, or the head name on a legislative bill in Reaper senate? If the Reapers cannot agree on the underlying purpose of the cycles or their end-goals, just how diverse is the "Reaper Nation"?

This led me to two possibilities:

1) Not all Reapers condone the cyclic genocides. In this event, could the control ending possibly lead to a Reaper civil war? Some Reapers may refuse to obey their self-destruct orders, or Shepard may opt to spare those who did not wish to participate in these atrocities. This would mirror in many ways the Geth vs. Heretics concepts.

2) All Reapers are idealogically committed to the cyclic genocides. If so, why? Are they all indoctrinated by some higher command order (possibly the Catalyst)? Is there a very good reason for their point of view? I have no conceptual problem with the idea that the Reapers really have a higher purpose, whatever it may be. But if Shepard could come to understand that purpose that drives them, is it possible that Shepard could come to agree with it? Control ending may only delay the cycle, not actually stop it. Thousands of years later, Shepard comes to see that the fundamental principles of Reaper holocaust are actually valid, and takes the safeties off again in order to preserve the organics of the next cycle...

Even if Shepard is able to destroy the Reapers through the control option, one theme we have seen time and again is a singular individual able to define or change Shepard's view of an entire species. Garrus was *not* a typical Turian, Legion was a very special Geth platform, Wrex was quite a bit different from your average Krogan, etc. Is it far fetched that one Reaper could alter Shepard's worldview in a similar way?

Obviously everyone's Shepard is different and some might persistently rebel against the "grand purpose", while others might lose their already tenuous connection to humanity and come to more closely identify with the Reapers.

Just some *wince* "speculations" I guess. Thanks for reading!

Modifié par Seijin8, 03 mai 2012 - 08:02 .


#1321
Hawk227

Hawk227
  • Members
  • 474 messages

delta_vee wrote...


The dissociative nature of the ending for those of us unconvinced of Indoc, is really what prompted the whole outrage (and the various critiques which have subsequently emerged). Given what we know of the development of the ending (how late it was in the dev cycle, etc), I'm quite willing to put chalk up most of these particular bits to the combination of rushed production, lack of proper planning, and heavy-handed stylistic choices.


I would say the dissociative nature of the ending was what got the balls rolling on IT, and I'd add that most IT believers only like the endings in the context of IT.


It boggles many a mind, for one reason or another. Not all, mind you, but plenty. And thus, here we are.

Indoc, to me, is fundamentally about faith. Faith in Bioware, faith in the legitimacy of the work, faith in the emotional and temporal investment made. Faith that expects to be rewarded eventually.

I'm...not much one for faith.


I'm an avowed atheist, so I'm not one for faith either. There's no doubt that faith plays a role (mostly faith in BW), but IT is not simply a post-facto theory built solely around faith. There is a huge swath of (largely circumstantial) evidence, and a broadly understood idea of how it fits into the narrative and how it is foreshadowed. It is very much possible these were all oversights and coincidences, but that is a lot of oversights and coincidences. Especially considering IT manages to explain most of those mind-boggling decisions, whether you think it was (hypothetically) executed well enough or not.


But there's an implied promise of narrative completion there - without it, as many before me have said, the game has no ending. The moment that (hypothetical) conclusion arrives, the narrative is literalized, and I'm not convinced the gap between the two serves any real ludonarrative purpose. (Certainly not this long a gap, anyways.)


I've said in response to others (and maybe even you?) that I thought the ideal time for a "The Truth" type DLC would be.... last week. I have no real sense of how much time is required to make the type of DLC required for this reveal (I imagine a LotSB size), but the fact we must wait until summer does not bode well. 

I've also said, and I'm sure you'd object, that I can invision the dev team thinking narrative completion wasn't really necessary. Indoctrination was the last great weapon Shepard hadn't faced, and if s/he were to overcome that then it is effectively all down hill from there. Up to the Citadel to activate the Crucible's actual function, perhaps fighting off a few waves of husks and banshees, almost certainly telling Harbinger to STFU. If IT was true, and they thought the cues were sufficiently obvious, then ME3 could join Inception in the realm of lots of speculation for eternity. Now, I'm not saying I agree. It just strikes me as a less severe miscalculation than what we got.

Here I'd add the entire Citadel coup mission, for reasons of believability and necessity. Knowing the intended placement to have been later in the game adds some context, but it doesn't help much. For that matter, it subverts the impact of the Citadel's later (entirely offscreen) capture and relocation. And it features Kai Leng, who is inexcusable on every level.


You keep referencing behind the scenes stuff that I've not heard before. You've stated the ending was saved until the very end, but I'd seen from several sources that it was written (or at least outlined) early in production. The leaked script (with Javik as the catalyst) seems to support this. Now you say the Citadel coup was meant to come much later. Where is this coming from?

Although... now that you point it out. I had forgotten (since I last played in March) that I never understood the point of the Cerberus coup to begin with. The only real explanation was its role as catalyst, but neither the Alliance nor Cerberus knew that until much later. It seems it would have fit better after the Chronos station mission.

Hmm, I should not have asked about all the ways the narrative was screwed... How did ME3 get "75 Perfect scores" again?

Speaking of the Citadel coup, it was yet another missed opportunity to have both Ashley and Kaidan react in different ways during the Udina scene.


For a series that generally did a very good job with character development, the Kaidan/Ashley thing always bugged me. In ME1 they were each vaguely interesting. Ashley had some interesting insight into mundane galactic civilization (like taking a day trip to visit her sister in the next cluster) and Kaidan was good for insight into the struggle of biotics and their L2 implants. But after that they morphed into the same annoying character, and for reasons that were unclear were treated as fundamentally important to Shepard in both ME2 and ME3. In my second playthrough, I left Kaidan at the dock. Twenty-five EMS points and no Kaidan, it was a win win. Considering how brilliant Mordin, Tali, Wrex, and Garrus all were, it was odd that Kaidan/Ashley were so contrastingly boring and abrasive. Maybe Mac wrote them.

#1322
nicethugbert

nicethugbert
  • Members
  • 5 209 messages

edisnooM wrote...

nicethugbert wrote...

edisnooM wrote...

nicethugbert wrote...

But, ME3 did convey meaning. ME3 said that you can have your morality, your paragon or renegade choices or what have you, but evolution is deus ex machina and does not care about your morality. Evolution is the master, and because of it you exist in it's world. Alive or dead, you will be another brick in the foundation of the future regardless of your morality.


I don't mean to be rude, but I'm not sure I understand what you're saying here.

If you mean our final choice than the only one that I can think of to have any effect on "Evolution" would be Destroy since it removes the Reapers who have been perverting the development of civilizations for countless cycles.

In Synthesis it is forcing a drastic change upon the Galaxy, which I wouldn't really consider "Evolving". And in Control the Reapers (and now Shepard) still continue to affect the course of the Galaxy (possibly in Synthesis as well).


Do humans stop evolution when they harvest plants and animals?  Do they pervert it?  The reapers did not stop Evolution in total.  They harvested it, catalogued it.  If anyhing, the reapers may have saved evolution if it is true that synthetics would have eradicated organic life and synthetics do not evolve. 

Show me objective proof that Evolution can be perverted.  It seems perverted to you.  But, that does not mean that Evolution can be perverted.

Why is drastic change not Evolution?  It is the diirection both synthetics and organics are heading if synthetics do not eradicate organics? 


But through the use of the Mass Relays the Reapers altered the course of civilizations development from the course it would have followed naturally, this would seem a perversion of natural flow. And by harvesting civilizations I would say they stop the development. If left unchecked could not species reach whatever level the civilization that created the Reapers achieved?

Padok Wiks actually speaks about the exact topic of drastic change on Surkesh, and how interferenc in the natural development of a species is a mistake. While Synthesis is perhaps the course that life is headed to in the ME universe, having it suddenly happen could have incredibly bad side effects. Perhaps the journey to the destination would have made them prepared for when they got there.

On the topic of the Synthetics vs Organics though we again have only the Catalyst telling us that this will happen without any chance to argue back, and the evidence I saw in my playthrough proved him wrong. Interestingly enough EDI and Javik had a discussion on the topic of Synthetics evolving, and the Geth themselves do not seem stagnant in their development. 


Edit: If I understand your original point correctly however what you are saying is that all the choices we made did not matter, and it was always going to come down to the ending we got because "Evolution"? Because I really don't see that presented anywhere throughout the series. In fact the series seemed to emphasis overcoming the impossible, defying the odds, and as Legion said "Building our own future".


Sentient specieis alter each other's civilizations all the time with their altruism.  We must not share the cure to cancer because those people over there must figure it out themselves?  If the reapers were to benevolently share the relays free of charge would we complain about it?

Bad side effects from who's perspective?  Evolution is a force of nature if not nature itself.  It simply imposes, if we can say that much.  To say as much already anthropomorphizes it.  It's like gravity.  Gravity is amoral and unaware.  It just simply is.

You can build own future but only in the confines of the universe.

#1323
RollaWarden

RollaWarden
  • Members
  • 135 messages

nicethugbert wrote...

Sentient specieis alter each other's civilizations all the time with their altruism.  We must not share the cure to cancer because those people over there must figure it out themselves?  If the reapers were to benevolently share the relays free of charge would we complain about it?

Bad side effects from who's perspective?  Evolution is a force of nature if not nature itself.  It simply imposes, if we can say that much.  To say as much already anthropomorphizes it.  It's like gravity.  Gravity is amoral and unaware.  It just simply is.

You can build own future but only in the confines of the universe.


You raise some important and complex ideas here, nicethugbert.  I'll try to personally and briefly respond to just the first of your ideas in the interests of brevity, and hope the others in this thread, because I bow to their intellects, will elaborate/discuss your other ideas.  By no means do I wish to invalidate your other points through the sin of my omission.  I simply fear the daunting Wall of Text *insert minor chord organ music* that I might create.

1. Yes, sentient species often alter other civilizations out of a sense of altruism.  I hope I"m not taking your statement out of context, but I think I might see your point.  I suppose, though, we should define the relativistic notion of "altruism."  Regarding ME3 and the ending, the Catalyst's statements--which might be regarded as altruistic, are at once decidedly not so (Yo' Dawg--to save you we're gonna' dissolve you into our cosmic blender) AND wholly at odds with both Sovereign's chilling imperatives to Shepard in ME1 and Harbinger's many ominous predictions in ME2.  Additionally, it would be difficult to reasonably argue that Harbinger's oft-repeated statement, "I am the harbinger of your perfection" are "altruistic."  Perhaps in a relative sense, to the Reapers, but not on a fundamental level to anyone else; the genocidal foreshadowing needed to drive the plot depends on the player's understanding that Harbinger's statements are anything BUT altruistic.  The nature and means of assimilation/cultural hegemony have been, to say the least, problematic and controversial throughout history.  Multicultural pluralism is indeed a complex, diffiuse, and nearly equally problematic idea.  But altrustically, a better argument can be made for it.

This theme of hegemony vs. plurality has been a vital one for me in the trilogy.  And in the ME3 ending, I wasn't allowed to even continue the discussion on any kind of meaningful level.  I was left with the social nihilist's red herring, "That's just the way it is."  As my Shepard and as a person, I am compelled to reject the red herring argument.  I've been able to, at every turn in the trilogy, wholly reject the illogical invalidation of "That's just the way it is."

But I can't, at the End of All Things ME (shameless Tolkien borrowing).  Here at the last, on the Catalyst's platform, I MUST accept the red herring?  The shoehorn into a gross logical fallacy is, in a word, unacceptable.

Oh, good grief.  The Wall of Text *minor organ chords* happened anyway.  Sigh.  Apologies.

Modifié par RollaWarden, 03 mai 2012 - 01:57 .


#1324
nicethugbert

nicethugbert
  • Members
  • 5 209 messages
What I'm trying to say is that evolution is a primal force, or larger force, however you might categorize it. Primal forces do not make way for other forces, all other forces smaller.

Have to go back to work.

#1325
ShatterSh0t

ShatterSh0t
  • Members
  • 82 messages

KitaSaturnyne wrote...


Mass Relays link two points in space directly to each other, Mass Relay A and Mass Relay B. When you use A, you are taken directly to B without consideration for the expanse of space between these two points. For a ship to travel between clusters like that without Mass Relay technology would take decades, perhaps longer given the distance between stars. The reason is that you no longer have that instant transmissions between points A and B, you have to travel the entire distance between the two points. This would require that each ship be able to regularly discharge their FTL drive core (remember that FTL drives build up static charge over time that can potentially fry the crew).



Rebuilding the Mass Relays is pointless because, as you said, the relays link 2 points directly.  If one was built in the Sol system.... well where the heck would it send everyone?

for laughs, straight to the Omega relay.

Also, lets not forget the derelict reaper.  It was able to indoctrinate the crew that recovered it.