858 réponses à ce sujet

[japinthebox]

3. You defend plot holes with by adding your own interpretation. This is kind of futile, we don't want to defend it. Look at the bible, a lot of plot holes with a lot of explainations that people will defend to the death. We don't want to fill in the plote holes with whatever "fan glue" you come up with.

I don't defend the plot holes that I already acknowledged. That'd be self-defeating. What I say is that the plot holes are easy to point out because they're inconsistent with the rest of the story, and if you leave them out, everything else makes a lot more sense.

Virtually all stories have plot holes. Even Shakespeare's works had tons. Except for the hecklers in the theatre, people usually don't have such a hard time looking past them.

- you're saying it was all hinted at before, but it wasn't about thse issues. Synths vs organics wasn't the central theme. For you, it might have been, but if I thought that's what the central theme of the prvious 2 games were about synths vs organics, I wouldn't have liked those games. I thought it was corruption and defiance. Mass effect 1 was about corrupt corporations, corrupt polititians, corrupt Krogan, ineffectual security and you pushing through to save the world. That's why I liked it.

I like the corruption stuff too. But Mass Effect is 100+ hours long. It can have more than one theme. And according to interviews, the synthetics vs. organics theme has been pointed out since before Mass Effect even had a name.

If it was about "synth vs. Organics"... eh. Mass effect 2 was about defiance. You defy death, you defy expectations, you defy the collectors, you defy prejudices, defy TiM.

Defying fate is easy in a game just because you can start from your last save point. A lot of game characters mention how lucky the protagonist is. That wasn't too interesting to me, though I wholeheartedly accept that you liked it.

4. You go on and on about how the resolution of the game was for the series as a whole...hopefully all aspiring writers will take this as a lesson: donkt do that. 90% of your fan base will not like it. In astory series, the final story has to be a complete, standalone story. It'll be judged as a standalone and will be criticized as ruining a whole franchise.

Actually, something nearly identical happened to a Japanese series called Astro Boy 60 years ago. The character's now as widely recognized as Hello Kitty, and he's a mascot for several prestigious universities and companies.

Not saying that'll necessarily be the case for Mass Effect, but it could.

If it's a crappy ending, it's a crappy ending... if they can get their money back, they should try to get their money back. If you wouldn't do that, that's your thing, but giving to charity is in no way a bad thing. The idea that you think that's bad is funny to me.

It devalues the idea of a charity. A charity is something where you give something large to get back something smaller. It's not a fair trade, and the donor by definition gets the crap end of the stick because they're doing it on the principle that things will be better for someone else. It also brings awareness to the cause.

The way this "charity" was set up, a lot of the donors had almost no idea what the charity was for. It brought attention to Mass Effect, not to Child's Play.

[The Spamming Troll]

MisterJB wrote...

Isn't it obvious?

Very well, first of all, the Reapers don't kill organics. At least not the entire race. They preserve them in Reaper form which they see as better than the inevitable extinction that would come at the hands of synthetics.

Second, given unending time to advance their technology, organics would, inevitably, create AIs that are more powerful than even the Reapers. Thus, the Reapers must Harvest organics before they can reach this level of technology.

except that your just making that up. where in the games does it state the purpose of species ooze? whats the point of human reaper in ME2 again???

your assuming synthetics evolve along only one path. did you or did you not see the evolution of the geth through out the series? did you not meet legion??? what proves organics will creat synthetics, which in turn will become more powerfull then the reapers? how long are those straws your pulling at?

Modifié par The Spamming Troll, 19 avril 2012 - 11:38 .

[sistersafetypin]

xsdob wrote...

sistersafetypin wrote...

xsdob wrote...

People just want to be ****s and jackasses about this.

Let it go and you'll feel much better, because arguing with a bunch of stuborn mules on the internet will only result in you, the person trying to use logic and reason instead of emotion and gut feelings, getting enraged and quitting for a while.

Every time I get worked up, I just take a five minute break, think of thoughts that help me become apathetic and uninterested towards all other posters here, and just go on with checking these forums for interesting opinion columns and news garbles.

So people either agree with you or their being stubborn jackasses? Um. ok

Well, I've gone back and forth arguing with people, using logical points, references from the game, bookmared sources, and all of it pretty much gets shot down with the repetitive argument of

"That doesn't matter because the game still sucks"

I can't beat subjective opinions with objective facts, and using subjctive facts just gets you labeld as a "speculator" so I just gave up.

So now I advice everyone who is despreatly trying to change peoples minds on something, no matter the reason, pro or anti in their stance, to give up and move on.

This is much healthier than trying to deabte someone and having the other person drag you into a flame war.

But since you take offense to what I've typed, how would you suggest I rewrite it? I'm guenienly curious.

I don't actually take offense that implies a level of involvement or caring that I lack. However, your original comment does not say that it's pointless to argue for or against the ending because it's pointless. Your original comment says that everyone is being a stubborn mule because they don't agree with you that the ending is awesome, or acceptable, or whatever your opinion is.

Which is ridiculous. You are not the only one entitled to your opinion and just because you use what you feel are facts to prove this point to others doesn't mean that you are right and other people are being stubborn. It means they have a different opinion then yours.

[japinthebox]

The Spamming Troll wrote...

MisterJB wrote...

Isn't it obvious?

Very well, first of all, the Reapers don't kill organics. At least not the entire race. They preserve them in Reaper form which they see as better than the inevitable extinction that would come at the hands of synthetics.

Second, given unending time to advance their technology, organics would, inevitably, create AIs that are more powerful than even the Reapers. Thus, the Reapers must Harvest organics before they can reach this level of technology.

except that your just making that up. where in the games does it state the purpose of species ooze? whats the point of human reaper in ME2 again???

your assuming synthetics evolve along only one path. did you or did you not see the evolution of the geth through out the series? did you not meet legion??? what proves organics will creat synthetics, which in turn will become more powerfull then the reapers? how long are those straws your pulling at?

Those straws are a few million or billion years long.

The Kardashev Scale suggests that things could exist that are more powerful than the Reapers. We haven't seen this happen yet (related to the so-called Fermi Paradox -- look it up), but the point is that it's something that has serious consideration in the scientific community, and so its an interesting starting point and/or ending point for a science fiction story.

Modifié par japinthebox, 19 avril 2012 - 11:43 .

[mpgeist]

I've still not read anything that's convincing about why the Catalyst helps Shepard at the end. Just let him fumble in the dark until he bleeds out and his cycle continues.

Modifié par mpgeist, 19 avril 2012 - 11:43 .

[Trentgamer]

My issues aren't even about the ending anymore. It's about the way BiowEAr has treated it and the consumers who buy their games. You don't treat customer concerns like they are trivial, or that the customer is too stupid to understand, that's just bad business. And as in the case of bad business, the company is now feeling the pinch which they themselves created with their consumers. I know I"m not the only one who won't be buying any more games with the EA label on them. So just keep defending that horrid, crappy, badly written ending all you want, the damage has been done and EA did it to themselves...not the other way around.

[Tleining]

@ OP & Article
Type II and III Civilizations:
I'm sorry. But classifying the Crucible as a Type III Technology because it can affect the entire Galaxy is .... wrong. The Crucible uses the Citadel (Center of the Relay Network) and the Relays to send it's Energy everywhere. So either the Crucible is Type II, or the Relay Network and the Reapers are Type III.

And that still doesn't explain how Type I Civilizations over several Cycles can create any Technology (Crucible) that has an unkown Technology (Catalyst) as an integral Part.

ME3 Ending foreshadowed in ME1:
uh, okay. Where?
At the End of ME1 Shepard wanted to look for some way to stop the Reapers.
At the End of ME2 Shepard once again makes it clear that there has to be some way to stop the Reapers

At the Start of ME3 we suddenly need a Superweapon (Magical Reaper-OFF-Button).

So where in ME1 was it ever said that we need to find a Superweapon and will end the War with one of three Options?

The other Points just seem pretty Pointless to me. Yes if i take Elements from various documentaries, maybe add the odd Element from other Sci-Fi-Series, ME3 makes perfect Sense. So shouldn't that be in the Game (Codex)?

The existence of the Geth and there willingness to co-exist with Organic-Species also contradicts most other Theories. But yes, if we take other documentaries and Sci-Fi-Series into account yada yada yada.

Sorry, like i said, to me, the Article is kinda pointless. Most of those Arguments have been brought up before and were either shown to ignore the Game-Lore or refuted.

MisterJB wrote...

Very well, first of all, the Reapers don't kill organics. At least not the entire race. They preserve them in Reaper form which they see as better than the inevitable extinction that would come at the hands of synthetics.

The Reapers didn't preserve the Protheans. They didn't show a lot of interest in the Species of the current Cycle, except Humans of course.

[japinthebox]

mpgeist wrote...

I've still not read anything that's convincing about why the Catalyst helps Shepard at the end. Just let him fumble in the dark and his cycle continues.

The Catalyst surrenders, because the Crucible forces it to.

The Catalyst's goals aren't entirely absurd, but they hold very little regard for galactic civilizations -- obviously. That's why when the Catalyst surrenders, it offers to let Shepard have his way.

I say this a few too many times in the article, something I've been meaning to fix...

[recentio]

Tleining wrote...

*snip*

The other Points just seem pretty Pointless to me. Yes if i take Elements from various documentaries, maybe add the odd Element from other Sci-Fi-Series, ME3 makes perfect Sense. So shouldn't that be in the Game (Codex)?

*snip*

This is the only question even necessary to completely annihilate any "defense" of the ending.

[shnellegaming]

Read the entire thing.  Didn't make me look differently at all.  Just another person that has to convince themselves the ending is ok by over analyzing it.  I mean he actually says, "if you ignore these errors it actually makes sense."  I have to ignore things for it to make sense?  How much sense does that make?

[Kreid]

TeffexPope wrote...

This article is pretty much speculation. That a group of type 1 civs could build a type 3 device is preposterous,
especially given that there's thousands of years between each group of civilizations.

It's not preposterous because it's not a type 3 device, it's analogous to type 3 technology in scale since it can influence the galaxy as a whole.

The game never states that Reapers are there to prevent the 'gray goo' scenario from happening, that is purely something injected by this guy. Bioware's reasoning was that synthetics would rebel against their creators in the form of wars, not a non-sentient nanotech replicator going haywire.

Use logic, not everything is laid out, how can something in the scale of the Geth threaten all organic life in the galaxy? Simple, it can't. The Catalyst is afraid of a Grey Goo or a Superintelligence scenario (Like the Ultimate Intelligence in Dan Simmons Hyperion novel which can consume whole galaxies and alter the fabric of time and space)

Basically, its fan fiction, and its a hell of a lot better than what we were fed by Bioware. But it is not a good defense of the ending, rather its a fix for the ending, which is not required if you really think the ending is fine.

How is this fanfiction? Many themes of ME are grounded on real scientific theories, you can even see in japinthebox's quote that BioWare do indeed consider stuff like tech Singularity as a framework for the ME universe.

Modifié par Creid-X, 19 avril 2012 - 11:49 .

[Zelto]

Well, I read the artical, skimmed some of it, its rather long.

Doesnt change my opinion on the ending, although some points i may agree with (mass relays maybe not killing everyone, nuclear bombs and nuclear power plans are the same thing, yet one kills you the other turns on your light!). He is assuming that they attempted to use highly theoretical science, maybe they did but personally i very much doubt it.

Firstly would like to point out from 3.18: 'BIG CRUNH' its not a gallaxy event but a universal one. i.e. the entire universe is destroyed (therefore you can find refuge from it by running to another gallexy the only option would be to stop it from happening). Thats just kinda anoying for someone who thinks they can talk down to other for not understanding the high physics that ME3 is using!


Finally in refernce to his conclusion, good art/literlature should make you think, should try and prove a point or challange perseptions. ME3's ending doenst do that, it just annoys people, so its not good art. And if the game ending was changed its not going to damage games of the future, or make all ending the same. It might however stop game companies from producing subpar (according to many many people who bought it and customers are the only people that matter) products.

p.s. Games are a product, the same as books and TV shows and jewelly and many many other things. some of these are classed as art, others not. Being art is meaningless, being good is what matters, and thats what they failed at (in my opinion), so I really don't care if its art or not.

[japinthebox]

shnellegaming wrote...

Read the entire thing.  Didn't make me look differently at all.  Just another person that has to convince themselves the ending is ok by over analyzing it.  I mean he actually says, "if you ignore these errors it actually makes sense."  I have to ignore things for it to make sense?  How much sense does that make?

Trust me, it's been a long time since I've read Shakespeare, but you have to ignore some plot holes even to enjoy something like Romeo and Juliet.

The point is that the plot holes are minor, and the rest of the story makes good sense. You can either throw out the plot holes and enjoy the rest of the game including the ending, or you can throw out the rest of the game and be furious about the plot holes in the end.

Your choice.

[MisterJB]

The Spamming Troll wrote...
except that your just making that up. where in the games does it state the purpose of species ooze? whats the point of human reaper in ME2 again???

Did you miss the part where the Catalyst flat out said, leaving absolute no room for doubt, that they preserve advanced organic species in Reaper form so they can leave room for other species to evolve?

your assuming synthetics evolve along only one path. did you or did you not see the evolution of the geth through out the series? did you not meet legion??? what proves organics will creat synthetics, which in turn will become more powerfull then the reapers? how long are those straws your pulling at?

I assume nothing. Read about the Kardashev scale. The advancement of technology is the natural course of life. Eventually, all species would become as powerful as the Reapers, given enough time.

And even if this was not fact, all that matters is that the Catalyst believes this is a problem that requires the Reapers to solve.

Tleining wrote...
The Reapers didn't preserve the Protheans. They didn't show a lot of interest in the Species of the current Cycle, except Humans of course.

EDI speculates that they tried to create a Prothean Reaper and failed.
And we don't know if the species of the current cycle were not meant to become Destroyers, and before you say that we have been killing them, the codex states that the Reapers only turn into husks those members of a species not fit into becoming part of a Reaper.
How do we know there are not Harvest ships on Pallaven or that they won't go there once all sentient life on Earth has been Harvested.

[KillerHappyFace]

I dislike the ending, but this is a pretty good article. Although he's pretty misinformed on a few later points, his justification of the Reaper's purpose is right on the money IMO. But misinterpreting the Reapers' purpose due to the bad explanation given is not the main reason the ending is bad.

The godchild is my #1 issue with the ending. He's the reason why no amount of clarity will let me truly enjoy the end of the game.

At best, godchild is an asspull and an undeserved deus ex machina. At worst (and we got the worst) he is all of the above, plus a blubbering idiot that can't explain advanced concepts to save his life.

Coming in close second, I still feel that each of the ending choices were horribly out of line with the main themes of the series. The series is about self-determination. Not just protecting life in the galaxy, but protecting life's freedom to choose its own fate. I don't want to have to revoke that in 2/3 of the endings of the game.

[sistersafetypin]

japinthebox wrote...

shnellegaming wrote...

Read the entire thing.  Didn't make me look differently at all.  Just another person that has to convince themselves the ending is ok by over analyzing it.  I mean he actually says, "if you ignore these errors it actually makes sense."  I have to ignore things for it to make sense?  How much sense does that make?

Trust me, it's been a long time since I've read Shakespeare, but you have to ignore some plot holes even to enjoy something like Romeo and Juliet.

The point is that the plot holes are minor, and the rest of the story makes good sense. You can either throw out the plot holes and enjoy the rest of the game including the ending, or you can throw out the rest of the game and be furious about the plot holes in the end.

Your choice.

Except the plot holes are in fact, not minor at all. Which is the heart of the problem. If the plot holes were so minor as to be easily overlooked there would be no need for the article in the first place

[TeffexPope]

Let's not forget the complete disowning of Harbinger. He does nothing in the game except show up at the end and shoot at you with his lazurz.

[recentio]

japinthebox wrote...

shnellegaming wrote...

Read the entire thing.  Didn't make me look differently at all.  Just another person that has to convince themselves the ending is ok by over analyzing it.  I mean he actually says, "if you ignore these errors it actually makes sense."  I have to ignore things for it to make sense?  How much sense does that make?

Trust me, it's been a long time since I've read Shakespeare, but you have to ignore some plot holes even to enjoy something like Romeo and Juliet.

The point is that the plot holes are minor, and the rest of the story makes good sense. You can either throw out the plot holes and enjoy the rest of the game including the ending, or you can throw out the rest of the game and be furious about the plot holes in the end.

Your choice.

Not true. It is because of a desire to hold onto the brilliant rest of the game that one becomes angry about a nonsensical ending that illegitimizes it. The choice to accept the sh** ending is the choice to say "This game isn't good enough to deserve a good ending."

[Shermos]

sp0ck 06 wrote...

 If you hated/disliked/didn't understand/were let down by the ending, read this editorial.

http://galacticpillo...ffect-3-ending/

It really might make you look differently at not just the ending but the whole of ME3.  If you want to love the conclusion to the series but just can't, please give this a read.  It's long but worth it.  

I already liked the ending, but this is a very good article. Thank you for posting it.

[japinthebox]

He is assuming that they attempted to use highly theoretical science, maybe they did but personally i very much doubt it.

I was speculating at the time of writing, but if you read The Final Hours, it turns out I was right.

Firstly would like to point out from 3.18: 'BIG CRUNH' its not a gallaxy event but a universal one. i.e. the entire universe is destroyed (therefore you can find refuge from it by running to another gallexy the only option would be to stop it from happening). Thats just kinda anoying for someone who thinks they can talk down to other for not understanding the high physics that ME3 is using!

I said "galaxy-scale" big crunch. I don't think it makes good sense either that a galaxy would just collapse on itself like that, which is probably another (minor) reason they threw it out.

Finally in refernce to his conclusion, good art/literlature should make you think, should try and prove a point or challange perseptions. ME3's ending doenst do that, it just annoys people, so its not good art. And if the game ending was changed its not going to damage games of the future, or make all ending the same. It might however stop game companies from producing subpar (according to many many people who bought it and customers are the only people that matter) products.

Prokofiev, Schoenberg, Bach, Beethoven, Tchaikovsky all annoyed the hell out of their audiences. They turned out to be hella important. A lot of these, like Tchaikovsky's "Rite of Spring", have caused riots -- and then later on became accepted as important contributions to music.

There were points in history when music was just part of theatre. It took people like these to re-legitimize it as its own art form.

p.s. Games are a product, the same as books and TV shows and jewelly and many many other things. some of these are classed as art, others not. Being art is meaningless, being good is what matters, and thats what they failed at (in my opinion), so I really don't care if its art or not.

Famous last words of the music industry.

Modifié par japinthebox, 19 avril 2012 - 11:59 .

[KingNewbs]

japinthebox wrote...

Famous last words of the music industry.

Yeah, man. Right on.

I sure do miss music.

[Tleining]

MisterJB wrote...

Tleining wrote...
The Reapers didn't preserve the Protheans. They didn't show a lot of interest in the Species of the current Cycle, except Humans of course.

EDI speculates that they tried to create a Prothean Reaper and failed.
And we don't know if the species of the current cycle were not meant to become Destroyers, and before you say that we have been killing them, the codex states that the Reapers only turn into husks those members of a species not fit into becoming part of a Reaper.
How do we know there are not Harvest ships on Pallaven or that they won't go there once all sentient life on Earth has been Harvested.

uhm ME2? Harbinger? Turians were too primitive, Quarians immune System disqualified them, Salarians lifespan was too short......

[Wrathra]

ReggarBlane wrote...

Speculations based on sloppy work is equally sloppy.

^ this

[japinthebox]

The godchild is my #1 issue with the ending. He's the reason why no amount of clarity will let me truly enjoy the end of the game.

Really? It's just an avatar for a computer. I'm completely indifferent on the choice to use the kid. There are tons of weird things like that throughout the game. I'm pretty sure there are bigger issues with the ending than that.

Coming in close second, I still feel that each of the ending choices were horribly out of line with the main themes of the series. The series is about self-determination. Not just protecting life in the galaxy, but protecting life's freedom to choose its own fate. I don't want to have to revoke that in 2/3 of the endings of the game.

I answered similarly earlier, but again, that's just one theme out of many. I don't see how that's thrown out either, except if you take the synthesis ending.