420 réponses à ce sujet

[incinerator950]

Mcfly616 wrote...

Optimystic_X.....you can clearly see that you're on your own this thread. Your points are more like biased opinions. Opinions that show your obvious satisfaction with the current ending.

Maybe you should just abandon your lost cause, because you're not going to change the majority of fans minds that the ending didn't blow donkey balls....

Thats right....the majority.....

Your attempts are just getting more Troll-like with every post.....you stand alone

You aren't doing any different.

[MisterJB]

The Angry One wrote...
I think it's more likely he'd try to insert various rocks into Joker's orifices for marooning him on the planet and denying him his chance to see the Reapers destroyed.

Ok, I will admit I've had a lot of fun picturing Javik's reaction to having his entire genetic structure altered to accomodate Reaper code.
I'm guilty, that would be hilarious.

[hoodaticus]

Our_Last_Scene wrote...

The Angry One wrote...

There is no good reason.
Joker would not do this. It is out of character. The whole galaxy could be exploding, and Joker would stay for Shepard.

Unless he thinks Shepard is dead.

Which he could not possibly believe given that two of your loyal squadmates also abandoned you on the battlefield before boarding the Normandy - and they were right there.

The lesson here is that when you find yourself in a plothole, stop digging.

[TheGreenAlloy]

MisterJB wrote...

Velocithon wrote...

If Joker had to flee, it would be because Shepard told him so. Just like in ME2.

Joker: "Shepard! Give me your location!"
Shepard: "Negative! There's no time. Pick up [squadmate 1] and [squadmate 2] from ground and get the hell out of here!"
Joker: "No way I'm not leaving without-"
Shepard: "That's an order, Joker...please."
Joker: "It's been an honor."

TWO plot holes solved right there.

And just introduced another. Joker and the Normandy were helping Sword fight the Reapers. Why would Shepard order Joker to retreat while the rest of the fleets were still fighting knowing that the retreat of the Normandy, the flagship, would demoralize everyone?

That doesn't introduce another, that other plothole is there right now anyway.

[The Angry One]

MisterJB wrote...

The Angry One wrote...
The themes are a core part of Mass Effect, and have been for 99% of the trilogy.
You tell me. Why should the final 1% override that.

You are still assuming that the way you play or interpret Mass Effect is the correct one.
If you save the Destiny Ascension, humanity joins the three Council races in opressing the lesser species (before they screw humanity over in ME2). Strenght through diversity.
However, you can let the Council die and extablish a new one under the control of humans (before that if retconned in ME3). In which, the story gives the message that the only way to keep the peace is through a strong but benevolent hand that belongs to a single species.
And how many times in ME3 can Shepard foll or outright extinct entire races to help Earth?
You interpret Mass Effect in a certain way and that's fine. Pick Destroy, I hope it is expanded.
But don't try to take options away from others who don't see the story in the same light you do.

Yeah and you know what? Not saving the Council is generally regarded in ME2 as A Bad Thing.
You're trying to use the negative outcomes of going against the theme as proof of anything? That's just proof of how badly the endings violate these themes. Because there is no choice. You, Shepard, do not get to follow or betray the themes by choice. You follow one path to the end, and that path betrays everything about Mass Effect.

Even an ultra renegade believes in their friends and the ultimate goal of defeating, DEFEATING the Reapers.
The endings violate even that.

[Ticonderoga117]

The Angry One wrote...

I think it's more likely he'd try to insert various rocks into Joker's orifices for marooning him on the planet and denying him his chance to see the Reapers destroyed.

Nah, I say death by airlock. This is especially brutal since the Normnady is on a planet, chucking him out the airlock will only bruise some bones. Thus this is done repeatedly to turn all of Joker's bones into a coarse dust. EDI will need to be taken care of which wouldn't take long since I don't see the Normandy being able to maintain EDI's blue box for long. Once that's gone, she's done.

[sistersafetypin]

Lookout1390 wrote...

"We promise Mac will get to write more this time around, he feels like he hasn't reached his true potential yet, he was always fond of purple"

-Casey Hudson on the EC

Wait, is this a real quote? Because if so the trolling is strong in that one

[BlazinCold]

In this regard, I hope fans give BioWare working space, since we got ourselves into this mess by leaking the original script first, leading to the God Child ending.

Balls.

[Devil Mingy]

sistersafetypin wrote...

Lookout1390 wrote...

"We promise Mac will get to write more this time around, he feels like he hasn't reached his true potential yet, he was always fond of purple"

-Casey Hudson on the EC

Wait, is this a real quote? Because if so the trolling is strong in that one

No.

Rest assured if Hudson says anything regarding the Extended Cut, it will not be a joke. Customer loyalty is already questionable as it is.

BlazinCold wrote...

In this regard, I hope fans give
BioWare working space, since we got ourselves into this mess by leaking
the original script first, leading to the God Child ending.

Balls.

Bull ****. There was no original script with an awesome ending. This has always been it. We only learned about the dark energy idea when Drew Karpyshyn mentioned it, and Mass Effect 3 was a completed game by then.

Modifié par Devil Mingy, 02 mai 2012 - 12:42 .

[The Angry One]

BlazinCold wrote...

In this regard, I hope fans give BioWare working space, since we got ourselves into this mess by leaking the original script first, leading to the God Child ending.

Balls.

Oh Mac Walters always had his god child, apparently.
I'm not sure if it was always meant to be the leader of the Reapers though. That was an addition we could've done without. It serves no purpose whatsoever, and paints Shepard as a fool for believing him.

[felipejiraya]

Have they?

May BioWare have mercy on our souls.

[MisterJB]

The Angry One wrote...
Yeah and you know what? Not saving the Council is generally regarded in ME2 as A Bad Thing.
You're trying to use the negative outcomes of going against the theme as proof of anything? That's just proof of how badly the endings violate these themes. Because there is no choice. You, Shepard, do not get to follow or betray the themes by choice. You follow one path to the end, and that path betrays everything about Mass Effect.

Even an ultra renegade believes in their friends and the ultimate goal of defeating, DEFEATING the Reapers.
The endings violate even that.

Stop regarding one way of looking at Mass Effect as the correct one. Miranda says humanity's position in the galaxy is stronger than ever; that spells a Good Thing to me.
A roleplaying game that beats you over the head with a "right theme" instead of letting you choose for yourself is not a very good one and I hold Mass Effect above that. It's why Tuchanka is amazing because you can see the merits in saving the krogan but also in keeping the genophage.

And DEFEAT doesn't equal DESTROY. The Reapers are defeated in all endings, the Cycle is broken, we can go back to killing each other.

Modifié par MisterJB, 02 mai 2012 - 12:43 .

[incinerator950]

The Angry One wrote...

MisterJB wrote...

The Angry One wrote...
The themes are a core part of Mass Effect, and have been for 99% of the trilogy.
You tell me. Why should the final 1% override that.

You are still assuming that the way you play or interpret Mass Effect is the correct one.
If you save the Destiny Ascension, humanity joins the three Council races in opressing the lesser species (before they screw humanity over in ME2). Strenght through diversity.
However, you can let the Council die and extablish a new one under the control of humans (before that if retconned in ME3). In which, the story gives the message that the only way to keep the peace is through a strong but benevolent hand that belongs to a single species.
And how many times in ME3 can Shepard foll or outright extinct entire races to help Earth?
You interpret Mass Effect in a certain way and that's fine. Pick Destroy, I hope it is expanded.
But don't try to take options away from others who don't see the story in the same light you do.

Yeah and you know what? Not saving the Council is generally regarded in ME2 as A Bad Thing.
You're trying to use the negative outcomes of going against the theme as proof of anything? That's just proof of how badly the endings violate these themes. Because there is no choice. You, Shepard, do not get to follow or betray the themes by choice. You follow one path to the end, and that path betrays everything about Mass Effect.

Even an ultra renegade believes in their friends and the ultimate goal of defeating, DEFEATING the Reapers.
The endings violate even that.

Surely you jest now, defeating your enemy doesn't mean just destroying them.  You can capture them, reason with them that there plans are bad, or even join them and usurp control.  Hell, sometimes someone realizes they made a mistake and just gives you the keys to the car explaining they need to change something. 

Also, what theme does that violate?  You are given one option at the end of ME 1, open the Relays and defeat Sovereign.  Your choice is an onscreen shot of the DA blowing up, followed by less battle scarring on Alliance Ships.  ME 2, you got a one way runaway that involves two different colors, with slightly different conversations, and then the same theater ending.  Linear plots don't have a complex theme unless they borrow from previously made franchises and examples.  Again, the Eragon of Sci-Fi plots. 

Generally stating your opinions like they're indesputable proof is also considered bad Angry.  

[stysiaq]

survivor_686 wrote...

In my cycle, building up pointless hype was punishable by death.

nothing else to add.

[Flyprdu]

sistersafetypin wrote...

I wish Jessica would stop tweeting. She brings out the Vorcha in me. "We no TRUST you!"

[Taboo]

MisterJB wrote...

The Angry One wrote...
Yeah and you know what? Not saving the Council is generally regarded in ME2 as A Bad Thing.
You're trying to use the negative outcomes of going against the theme as proof of anything? That's just proof of how badly the endings violate these themes. Because there is no choice. You, Shepard, do not get to follow or betray the themes by choice. You follow one path to the end, and that path betrays everything about Mass Effect.

Even an ultra renegade believes in their friends and the ultimate goal of defeating, DEFEATING the Reapers.
The endings violate even that.

Stop regarding one way of looking at Mass Effect as the correct one. Miranda says humanity's position in the galaxy is stronger than ever; that spells a Good Thing to me.
A roleplaying game that beats you over the head with a "right theme" instead of letting you choose for yourself is not a very good one and I hold Mass Effect above that. It's why Tuchanka is amazing because you can see the merits in saving the krogan but also in keeping the genophage.

And DEFEAT doesn't equal DESTROY. The Reapers are defeated in all endings, the Cycle is broken, we can go back to killing each other.

You need to stop posting. At this point all I'm doing is laughing uproariously at you. You are in the vocal minority here. Resistence is futile.

[Clayless]

The Angry One wrote...

Seeing as though literally nothing I can say will convince you, as you already gave me this challenge previously and I nailed it and you disappeared, like that time when you made the thread saying the ending isn't artistic and then disappeared when it got shot down,

I see lying is your strong suit.
I mean, seriously? How does a claim that the ending is not artistic get "shot down"?
I have no idea what topic you're talking about in any case.

Sorry I got it wrong, you actually said the ending wasn't art and Bioware needs to "admit they're wrong".

But apparently lying is my strong suit so you never got shot down and disappeared like you usually do and you can be excused for not remembering it because it doesn't actually exist.

The Angry One wrote...

how about you put to use to only thing you seem to do around here, complain about the ending, and actually detail what you think will be a good explanation for Joker fleeing in the EC?

There is no possible explanation. It is out of character. The fleeing and crash scenes are unecesarry and need to be cut. They have no dialog in any case, they are expendable.

Remember you can't say nothing/remove it as we know the EC isn't gonna do that.

Well, to be credible. It must. The Normandy scene is a failboat to nowhere. It could be entirely removed and replaced with absolutely NO changes to the rest of the ending. Literally, nothing.

So in other words you're not going to speculate? Why are you challenging other people to speculate if you don't like what they're going to say/aren't gonna do it yourself? And don't you realise how petty is it to spend more time complaining about one thing you don't like than you did playing the entire series? Especially as you said you're barely here anymore.

[The Angry One]

MisterJB wrote...

Stop regarding one way of looking at Mass Effect as the correct one. Miranda says humanity's position in the galaxy is stronger than ever; that spells a Good Thing to me.
A roleplaying game that beats you over the head with a "right theme" instead of letting you choose for yourself is not a very good one and I hold Mass Effect above that.

And then you go to the Citadel and hear about how everybody's pissed off at you for being a jerk.

Which is fine, but again, the themes are still there, and ME3 railroads you into violating them no matter what.

It's why Tuchanka is amazing because you can see the merits in saving the krogan but also in keeping the genophage.

Only if Wrex is dead, otherwise the game beats you over the head with the idea that the Krogan at least deserve another chance.

And DEFEAT doesn't equal DESTROY. The Reapers are defeated in all endings, the Cycle is broken, we can go back to killing each other.

Defeat means stop and hold to account. This does not happen in synthesis. At all.

[Reptilian Rob]

The Angry One wrote...

MisterJB wrote...

Stop regarding one way of looking at Mass Effect as the correct one. Miranda says humanity's position in the galaxy is stronger than ever; that spells a Good Thing to me.
A roleplaying game that beats you over the head with a "right theme" instead of letting you choose for yourself is not a very good one and I hold Mass Effect above that.

And then you go to the Citadel and hear about how everybody's pissed off at you for being a jerk.

Which is fine, but again, the themes are still there, and ME3 railroads you into violating them no matter what.

It's why Tuchanka is amazing because you can see the merits in saving the krogan but also in keeping the genophage.

Only if Wrex is dead, otherwise the game beats you over the head with the idea that the Krogan at least deserve another chance.

And DEFEAT doesn't equal DESTROY. The Reapers are defeated in all endings, the Cycle is broken, we can go back to killing each other.

Defeat means stop and hold to account. This does not happen in synthesis. At all.

Honestly, I feel like the EC is going to be another thing that will hurt the inside of my anus. 

[The Angry One]

incinerator950 wrote...

Surely you jest now, defeating your enemy doesn't mean just destroying them.  You can capture them, reason with them that there plans are bad, or even join them and usurp control.  Hell, sometimes someone realizes they made a mistake and just gives you the keys to the car explaining they need to change something. 

Okay, sure.
When does this happen in ME3?

Keep in mind that in synthesis, the Reapers only stop because you make organics like them. They therefore tolerate the new hybrids and leave them alone, unrepentant, they'll probably go off to terrorise another galaxy.

Also, what theme does that violate?  You are given one option at the end of ME 1, open the Relays and defeat Sovereign.  Your choice is an onscreen shot of the DA blowing up, followed by less battle scarring on Alliance Ships.  ME 2, you got a one way runaway that involves two different colors, with slightly different conversations, and then the same theater ending.  Linear plots don't have a complex theme unless they borrow from previously made franchises and examples.  Again, the Eragon of Sci-Fi plots. 

Generally stating your opinions like they're indesputable proof is also considered bad Angry.  

You're given the choice. That's what you're not given in ME3.

[Kunari801]

BlazinCold wrote...

In this regard, I hope fans give BioWare working space, since we got ourselves into this mess by leaking the original script first, leading to the God Child ending.

Balls.

You assume the leak made them change the ending, we don't know that for sure.  The leak was the ending that Drew Karpyshyn sketched up, since he left the team mid-way through ME2 they could have decided to dump it totally before the leak. 

[Taboo]

Has no one studied narrative psychology?

Does anyone else know that leaving the audience with TOO many questions is a bad thing? That the only good type of speculation is the Hanekian kind? The one that doesn't insult the audience because it DOESN'T allow emotional investment.

Well?

[The Angry One]

Our_Last_Scene wrote...

Sorry I got it wrong, you actually said the ending wasn't art and Bioware needs to "admit they're wrong".

But apparently lying is my strong suit so you never got shot down and disappeared like you usually do and you can be excused for not remembering it because it doesn't actually exist.

Look at me! I didn't remember a topic I made a month ago! Whoopdeefreakingdoo.

No, the lying part was you "shooting it down". Thou dost think too much of thineself.

So in other words you're not going to speculate? Why are you challenging other people to speculate if you don't like what they're going to say/aren't gonna do it yourself?

I'm challenging you to speculate now? Whatever.
No. You asked for my solution. I gave it. The scene needs to be deleted and replaced. The end. The scene as is does not work, and cannot work under any circumstance. That's my point.

And don't you realise how petty is it to spend more time complaining about one thing you don't like than you did playing the entire series? Especially as you said you're barely here anymore.

I've never made personal jabs against you, why must you continually do it to me?

I'm going to make this perfectly clear. The time I spend here is none of your god damn business.
I will now ignore anything you say related to this from now on, either stick to the argument or go pester someone else.

[incinerator950]

The Angry One wrote...

incinerator950 wrote...

Surely you jest now, defeating your enemy doesn't mean just destroying them.  You can capture them, reason with them that there plans are bad, or even join them and usurp control.  Hell, sometimes someone realizes they made a mistake and just gives you the keys to the car explaining they need to change something. 

Okay, sure.
When does this happen in ME3?

Keep in mind that in synthesis, the Reapers only stop because you make organics like them. They therefore tolerate the new hybrids and leave them alone, unrepentant, they'll probably go off to terrorise another galaxy.

Also, what theme does that violate?  You are given one option at the end of ME 1, open the Relays and defeat Sovereign.  Your choice is an onscreen shot of the DA blowing up, followed by less battle scarring on Alliance Ships.  ME 2, you got a one way runaway that involves two different colors, with slightly different conversations, and then the same theater ending.  Linear plots don't have a complex theme unless they borrow from previously made franchises and examples.  Again, the Eragon of Sci-Fi plots. 

Generally stating your opinions like they're indesputable proof is also considered bad Angry.  

You're given the choice. That's what you're not given in ME3.

Nonsense!  You're given the choice to end two major conflicts in order to end a massive one.  Then, you get a spectacular ending based off information that was barely foreshadowed by another Prothean VI!  Oh, and you get three colors and several clips showing bare ass essentials, but yeah.

The Catalyst says you proved that the current solution is no longer viable, and you're going to do it because Bioware is too lazy to provide a more complex, compelling, and decisive ending besides visually showing you that your choice did something.

Also, I'm reffering to Control over Destroy, I usually add Synthesis as that weird ending most people look at in confusion like Silent Hill bonus endings.  Actually, lets just pretend its not there, like the Welsh.

[Ticonderoga117]

Taboo-XX wrote...

Has no one studied narrative psychology?

Does anyone else know that leaving the audience with TOO many questions is a bad thing? That the only good type of speculation is the Hanekian kind? The one that doesn't insult the audience because it DOESN'T allow emotional investment.

Well?

Can't say I have, but it makes sense. There's good speculation where it's relatively isolated and not a major part of the plot versus bad speculation where it's the opposite.

Wish they would've went with the good.