897 réponses à ce sujet

[Velocithon]

Taboo-XX wrote...

Velocithon wrote...

Bioware just seems like complete utter retards right now. I'm sorry I don't like calling them that, but from the ****** poor job with this game to the god awful way they've handled everything...there just is no better word.

I know great directors who have failed. But I've never seen someone fail this badly in my lifetime.

Can't say I know anyone, but I imagine most self resepecting directors would admit their faults, apologize, and maybe even say something along the lines of "I really like what we did, we aren't going to change that. I'm sorry you don't like it, but we want to make it up to you." and proceed to offer options that will allow a fix of some sorts.

This complete silence is just maddening. The announcement of the EC did nothing at all! It just made matters worse because Bioware still isn't telling us wtf we just played, and isn't even going to fix what we hate. They're simply going to explain how badly this turd smells. This refusal to admit fault is astonishing.

[Peranor]

nuculerman wrote...

Seryl wrote...

Both options are wrong. Were I put in that postion, the only moral thing
to do would be to abstain. It is not for me, or anybody else, to make
that choice.

This.  Though I posted I would push the button, that was under the assumption one thing or the other was going to happen.

And as someone else jokingly pointed out, we do have a moral choice.  Turn the game off, and pretend our Shepard's answer to "which 3" was simply "no."  However, as it's a game, and I want to finish it, I chose one of the three.

I did just that. Turn the game off. I've never finished it. And I don't think I ever will. Stopped after Cronos Station. I would however choose destroy if someone held a gun to my head and forced me to finish the game.

[nitefyre410]

Seryl wrote...

Taboo-XX wrote...

I know great directors who have failed. But I've never seen someone fail this badly in my lifetime.

This is why I'm so interested in this. It is unlikely that I will see a failure this epic, and this public, again.

 

Really? Just wait till ME 4  as they trying to make a sequel off this nonsense. 

[nuculerman]

Nyoka wrote...
Since the problems of synthesis can't be resolved, they're trying to say the geth and EDI don't die so paragons can pick destruction and feel a little better about it.

Which destroys the whole point of the ending.  That would be removing the one aspect of the ending that's even remotely interesting (the fact it's a difficult choice, and we can have these debates about it). 

[Mylia Stenetch]

Nyoka wrote...

Mylia Stenetch wrote...

Nyoka wrote...

Problem is they're now backtracking saying maybe the geth and EDI don't die. Meaning, Synthesis was meant to be the paragon ending, but this decision is not very paragon and they didn't realize that. Too impressed by their own metaphors and symbols to really think about it, probably.

No Synthesis would not be the paragon ending. The Paragon/Renegade system is thrown out the door for the end of the game.

A paragon struggling through the ending:
Synthesis? Oh hell no. I wouldn't play God with the lives of trillions. I'm fighting for them, I don't own them.
Control? You kidding? I just killed TIM because he wanted to control too much and I have spent 3 games fighting against the reapers' control of people, and now I'm going to do that exact thing?
Destruction? And killing EDI and the geth whom I just convinced to join me, now that we're cool and EDI is asking all sorts of questions about life and she's even got a boyfriend, now I'm going to kill them all?

But in the eyes of Bioware, synthesis is just fine for paragons, because metaphors. In their own words, it wouldn't be any more organics or synthetics, just life, now everything's just life and we all get along just fine. That's what they had in mind while writing this ending. They thought it would suit paragons, but they were sadly mistaken.

Since the problems of synthesis can't be resolved, they're trying to say the geth and EDI don't die so paragons can pick destruction and feel a little better about it.

I did flesh out my answer soon afterwards explaining why the paragon/renegade was through out the window.

[Taboo]

Velocithon wrote...

Taboo-XX wrote...

Velocithon wrote...

Bioware just seems like complete utter retards right now. I'm sorry I don't like calling them that, but from the ****** poor job with this game to the god awful way they've handled everything...there just is no better word.

I know great directors who have failed. But I've never seen someone fail this badly in my lifetime.

Can't say I know anyone, but I imagine most self resepecting directors would admit their faults, apologize, and maybe even say something along the lines of "I really like what we did, we aren't going to change that. I'm sorry you don't like it, but we want to make it up to you." and proceed to offer options that will allow a fix of some sorts.

This complete silence is just maddening. The announcement of the EC did nothing at all! It just made matters worse because Bioware still isn't telling us wtf we just played, and isn't even going to fix what we hate. They're simply going to explain how badly this turd smells. This refusal to admit fault is astonishing.

I know them and have worked with them. Real artists fess up to mistakes. Real artists take criticism. I could list quite a few filmmakers.

Were they not expecting anyone would notice these faults? Is it hubris that causes these problems. Unfortunately I know directors who do the same thing.......

Modifié par Taboo-XX, 26 avril 2012 - 09:50 .

[Velocithon]

There's really no way they can make ME4.

The only way to do so would involve literally breaking every bit of canon and/or being so incredibly ridiculous you'd just laugh and cry at the same time.

[fainmaca]

What I am is just as much a part of Who I am as the events that have led up to my current situation. Synthesis would take that away, replacing it with a predestined 'default' state of being. That, above all else, is repulsive.

[Kunari801]

nuculerman wrote...

Nyoka wrote...
Since the problems of synthesis can't be resolved, they're trying to say the geth and EDI don't die so paragons can pick destruction and feel a little better about it.

Which destroys the whole point of the ending.  That would be removing the one aspect of the ending that's even remotely interesting (the fact it's a difficult choice, and we can have these debates about it). 

I'd like to see "Destroy" split up too, with high enough EMS you can choose to kill the Reapers and yourself (Thus saving the Geth & EDI) or sacrifice the Geth & EDI to save yourself.   Sacrifice will still need to be made.  

[Sean]

Taboo-XX wrote...

It's a joke. I cannot fathom the implications. The horror. Who the hell thought this was a good idea?

Remember they didn't make the ending. Not really anyways.

They just stole it from Deus Ex.

[Skull Bearer]

[quote]Taboo-XX wrote...

[quote]nitefyre410 wrote...

[quote]Taboo-XX wrote...

*Snip* 
[/quote]

The problem! It rears it's head again!

[/quote]  


The problem being that we are trying to make choices to solve a problem that we do have the God Tier level  clearance to make?

[/quote]

Problem logical thinkers?

The implications........uhhhhhhh.

[/quote]

The one problem with these arguments equating the Reaperkid's problems with Hiroshima/homophobia, is that this assumes we accept the Reaperkid's assumption that there is a synthetic/organic problem in the first place.

[Taboo]

Kunari801 wrote...

nuculerman wrote...

Nyoka wrote...
Since the problems of synthesis can't be resolved, they're trying to say the geth and EDI don't die so paragons can pick destruction and feel a little better about it.

Which destroys the whole point of the ending.  That would be removing the one aspect of the ending that's even remotely interesting (the fact it's a difficult choice, and we can have these debates about it). 

I'd like to see "Destroy" split up too, with high enough EMS you can choose to kill the Reapers and yourself (Thus saving the Geth & EDI) or sacrifice the Geth & EDI to save yourself.   Sacrifice will still need to be made.  

People should remember that this falls under clarity and closure.

[Taboo]

[quote]Skull Bearer wrote...

[quote]Taboo-XX wrote...

[quote]nitefyre410 wrote...

[quote]Taboo-XX wrote...

*Snip* 
[/quote]

The problem! It rears it's head again!

[/quote]  


The problem being that we are trying to make choices to solve a problem that we do have the God Tier level  clearance to make?

[/quote]

Problem logical thinkers?

The implications........uhhhhhhh.

[/quote]

The one problem with these arguments equating the Reaperkid's problems with Hiroshima/homophobia, is that this assumes we accept the Reaperkid's assumption that there is a synthetic/organic problem in the first place.

[/quote]

He doesn't present any evidence. At all. None. How would he know this would happen?

[Seryl]

MisterJB wrote...

Seryl wrote...
Both options are wrong. Were I put in that postion, the only moral thing
to do would be to abstain. It is not for me, or anybody else, to make
that choice.

In History past, homosexuality was viewed as a crime
and a mortal sin. Now, it is (mostly) accepted. What would your
reaction be if this choice was offered to those in the past? How would you judge them had they taken the "Remove Homosexuality at the push of a button" option? To
them, the benefits of such a choice would be free for everybody, with
none left behind and the ends of eliminating that "sin" would justify
the cost. Would you agree that what they did was a good thing then? To
them it was a better world.

I've not see any indication that "Synthesis" is a "Remove homosexuality" and not a "Remove homophobia" option.

You're sidestepping the question.

And I have already stated I would push the "Remove homophobia" button.

Then you are supremely arrogant. I rarely resort to ad hominems on the Internet, but I do think this is apt.

Reread what I wrote about how those past would have pushed the "Remove Homosexuality" button and they would have been just as justified and correct in their line of reasoning as you are. They wouldn't have known what they were doing; they wouldn't have had all the information required to make a decision of that magnitude, but they would have believed themselves to be right. It's pure hubris.

There are myths, legends and all kinds of other tales warning of this sort of hubris and how it always ends badly. History records lots of instances of people doing this kind of thing. The phrase "The road to Hell is paved with good intentions" sums up why this is not a decision that people should be tempted to make.

Modifié par Seryl, 26 avril 2012 - 09:54 .

[nitefyre410]

nuculerman wrote...

Nyoka wrote...
Since the problems of synthesis can't be resolved, they're trying to say the geth and EDI don't die so paragons can pick destruction and feel a little better about it.

Which destroys the whole point of the ending.  That would be removing the one aspect of the ending that's even remotely interesting (the fact it's a difficult choice, and we can have these debates about it). 

 

Why do we need a differcult choice,  to show the cost of the war ... really I can do  that easily.  Billions are dead, Billions more in displaced refugees, huge supply shortages, a break down of the law and order due  riots and supply shortages.   Pirates would have a field day, the Ecomony is shambles. the list could go on. 

The Relays nor  sacrificing the Geth or EDI are needed to  show the cost of the Reaper War.    None of  the choices present  get across the  cost of the anything in any meaningful way. 

[fainmaca]

Also, believeing Synthesis would solve anything is just naive. So what if there's 'just life'? We're all 'just Humans' on this planet, but we sure find enough to confront each other about. Unless you forcibly control everyone through this ending, there's no way to guarantee that it ends in peace.

[Taboo]

Seryl wrote...

MisterJB wrote...

Seryl wrote...
Both options are wrong. Were I put in that postion, the only moral thing
to do would be to abstain. It is not for me, or anybody else, to make
that choice.

In History past, homosexuality was viewed as a crime
and a mortal sin. Now, it is (mostly) accepted. What would your
reaction be if this choice was offered to those in the past? How would you judge them had they taken the "Remove Homosexuality at the push of a button" option? To
them, the benefits of such a choice would be free for everybody, with
none left behind and the ends of eliminating that "sin" would justify
the cost. Would you agree that what they did was a good thing then? To
them it was a better world.

I've not see any indication that "Synthesis" is a "Remove homosexuality" and not a "Remove homophobia" option.

You're sidestepping the question.

And I have already stated I would push the "Remove homophobia" button.

Then you are supremely arrogant. I rarely resort to ad hominems on the Internet, but I do think this is apt.

Reread what I wrote about how those past would have pushed the "Remove Homosexuality" button and they would have been just as justified and correct in their line of reasoning as you are. They wouldn't have known what they were doing; they wouldn't have had all the information required to make a decision of that magnitude, but they would have believed themselves to be right. It's pure hubris.

There are myths, legends and all kinds of other tales warning of this sort of hubris and how it always ends badly. History records lots of instances of people doing this kind of thing. The phrase "The road to Hell is paved with good intentions" sums up why this is not a decision that people should be tempted to make.

Hubris seems to be reflected on endings like something Godard would have made. He thought he knew how the world should work as well. Oh, God, the film Weekend 

[nuculerman]

Kunari801 wrote...

nuculerman wrote...

Nyoka wrote...
Since the problems of synthesis can't be resolved, they're trying to say the geth and EDI don't die so paragons can pick destruction and feel a little better about it.

Which destroys the whole point of the ending.  That would be removing the one aspect of the ending that's even remotely interesting (the fact it's a difficult choice, and we can have these debates about it). 

I'd like to see "Destroy" split up too, with high enough EMS you can choose to kill the Reapers and yourself (Thus saving the Geth & EDI) or sacrifice the Geth & EDI to save yourself.   Sacrifice will still need to be made.  

The issue is they'd need to make that clear in the ending dialogue with starchild, which they've made pretty clear they have no intention of doing.  So all we're getting is a group of cutscenes, one of which will be "just kidding!  Actually destroy was the right choice and starChild lied to you!  Please love us again!"

If they were to rewrite the ending dialogue, I'd agree with your proposal.  Especially with a LI, killing yourself to save the Geth/EDI wouldn't be a straightforward choice, even for non selfish versions of Shepard.

[Kunari801]

anorling wrote...

nuculerman wrote...

Seryl wrote...

Both options are wrong. Were I put in that postion, the only moral thing
to do would be to abstain. It is not for me, or anybody else, to make
that choice.

This.  Though I posted I would push the button, that was under the assumption one thing or the other was going to happen.

And as someone else jokingly pointed out, we do have a moral choice.  Turn the game off, and pretend our Shepard's answer to "which 3" was simply "no."  However, as it's a game, and I want to finish it, I chose one of the three.

I did just that. Turn the game off. I've never finished it. And I don't think I ever will. Stopped after Cronos Station. I would however choose destroy if someone held a gun to my head and forced me to finish the game.

Quit game after Anderson dies and I use "Head Canon"

[Skull Bearer]

[quote]Taboo-XX wrote...

[quote]Skull Bearer wrote...

[quote]Taboo-XX wrote...

[quote]nitefyre410 wrote...

[quote]Taboo-XX wrote...

*Snip* 
[/quote]

The problem! It rears it's head again!

[/quote]  


The problem being that we are trying to make choices to solve a problem that we do have the God Tier level  clearance to make?

[/quote]

Problem logical thinkers?

The implications........uhhhhhhh.

[/quote]

The one problem with these arguments equating the Reaperkid's problems with Hiroshima/homophobia, is that this assumes we accept the Reaperkid's assumption that there is a synthetic/organic problem in the first place.

[/quote]

He doesn't present any evidence. At all. None. How would he know this would happen?

[/quote]

This is one of the reasons people are equating Reaperkid to Hitler, it's not just that his options are reprehensible, it's that they're reprehensible and the problem they're supposed to solve doesn't exist.

[Mylia Stenetch]

fainmaca wrote...

Also, believeing Synthesis would solve anything is just naive. So what if there's 'just life'? We're all 'just Humans' on this planet, but we sure find enough to confront each other about. Unless you forcibly control everyone through this ending, there's no way to guarantee that it ends in peace.

People justify worse to help "save the world". There is no guarantee in any ending that there will peace. The only thing we know is we stopped the reaper invasion for this cycle.

[Taboo]

Kunari801 wrote...

anorling wrote...

nuculerman wrote...

Seryl wrote...

Both options are wrong. Were I put in that postion, the only moral thing
to do would be to abstain. It is not for me, or anybody else, to make
that choice.

This.  Though I posted I would push the button, that was under the assumption one thing or the other was going to happen.

And as someone else jokingly pointed out, we do have a moral choice.  Turn the game off, and pretend our Shepard's answer to "which 3" was simply "no."  However, as it's a game, and I want to finish it, I chose one of the three.

I did just that. Turn the game off. I've never finished it. And I don't think I ever will. Stopped after Cronos Station. I would however choose destroy if someone held a gun to my head and forced me to finish the game.

Quit game after Anderson dies and I use "Head Canon"

If your audience must head canon Bioware please be aware that you have failed in the speculation department. You have FAILED to provide information to speculate upon.

[IanPolaris]

Mylia Stenetch wrote...

fainmaca wrote...

Also, believeing Synthesis would solve anything is just naive. So what if there's 'just life'? We're all 'just Humans' on this planet, but we sure find enough to confront each other about. Unless you forcibly control everyone through this ending, there's no way to guarantee that it ends in peace.

People justify worse to help "save the world". There is no guarantee in any ending that there will peace. The only thing we know is we stopped the reaper invasion for this cycle.

We don't even know that.  By picking Synthesis (assuming starbrat is telling the truth mind you), you have just unshacked genocidal machines with no control and no means of control whatsoever.  There is nothing to stop them from wiping everything out and Starbrat never says they won't.

-Polaris

[Mylia Stenetch]

Nyoka wrote...

nuculerman wrote...

Nyoka wrote...
Since the problems of synthesis can't be resolved, they're trying to say the geth and EDI don't die so paragons can pick destruction and feel a little better about it.

Which destroys the whole point of the ending.  That would be removing the one aspect of the ending that's even remotely interesting (the fact it's a difficult choice, and we can have these debates about it). 

Well, you should go and tell that to the paragons over at the thematically revolting thread. That in order to save the galaxy you have to betray all the values that the previous 100 hours have upheld and celebrated, leaving no room for the role they have been playing all this time and turning their so far triumphant heroes into nihilistic monsters. That they should accept that because otherwise you wouldn't find the ending interesting.

They should of been pissed once Arrival is out and you cannot save the Batarians. There is more lore, paragon/renegade issues if you look at them as Good vs Evil.