249 réponses à ce sujet

[mmmpollo]

xsdob wrote...

I wouldn't becasue that raises the giant plot hole of how 1 billion years worth of species could all fail and somehow this cycle doesn't.

After ME1, how did this cycle differ from every other cycle?  Reapers lost control of the keepers and thus couldn't control the citadel to disable the mass relays.  This galaxy is united while previous cycles were completely cut off.  They could've really drove home that motif of strength through unity, only together can we destroy the Reapers.  Cooperate, get a really big army, wreck the Reapers.

[SoloPala]

If a giant worm and some ground based missiles kill a reaper, conventional victory isn't a crazy idea, especially with the revelation that reapers are vulnerable when firing their main weapon, and the addition of reaper based weapon tech on ships from studying Sovereign, while denying them control of the relays and the citadel which they always did previously.

[LoganofET]

Pottumuusi wrote...

LoganofET wrote...

Why can't we just put Indaina Jones 5 in space and be done with it?

Dear lord... Did you even watch Kingdom of the Crystal Skull?

That was aliens on earth in an anceint human civilazation, I want Indy looking though anceint  alien civilazations.

Oh, wait you meant quailty.

[PsyrenY]

SoloPala wrote...

If a giant worm and some ground based missiles kill a reaper, conventional victory isn't a crazy idea, especially with the revelation that reapers are vulnerable when firing their main weapon, and the addition of reaper based weapon tech on ships from studying Sovereign, while denying them control of the relays and the citadel which they always did previously.

They needed "the mother of all thresher maws" and an orbital strike just to kill two Destroyers.

[xsdob]

mmmpollo wrote...

xsdob wrote...

I wouldn't becasue that raises the giant plot hole of how 1 billion years worth of species could all fail and somehow this cycle doesn't.

After ME1, how did this cycle differ from every other cycle?  Reapers lost control of the keepers and thus couldn't control the citadel to disable the mass relays.  This galaxy is united while previous cycles were completely cut off.  They could've really drove home that motif of strength through unity, only together can we destroy the Reapers.  Cooperate, get a really big army, wreck the Reapers.

I suppose, but using never before used tactics and technology isn't conventional warfare, it's innpvative warfare.

But I see your point and I concied to it. That pretty much pulls the plug on that one.

[Laurencio]

Vortex13 wrote...

I would have prefered conventional victory personally.

In fact that is what I thought the Crucible was when I started playing, a massive weapon that would bring the Reapers down to our level, enabling the Alliance to fight them on even ground.

Disable their shields, disrupt communications, targeting, ANYTHING to make them vulnerable in a straight up fight would have been better than the Red, Blue, or Green endings that we were given.

The story of ME3 didn't have to show the races of the galaxy killing every single Reaper, I would have been just fine with Shepard and Co. destroying Harbinger and the fleet around Earth, but leaving the rest of the Reapers alive; in disarray and retreating but alive.

Really that would have made a Mass Effect 4 or even a Mass Effect MMO easier to create. The Mass Effect universe still exists and EA/Bioware would have a readily milkable francise in their collective pockets. Rather than the Warhammer 40K-esque picture of the game's universe that we are left with.

The crucible was an obvious overpowered superweapon from the second it was mentioned. I was so angry when Hackett talked about it that I wanted the game to end before it had to be used, because I knew it was going to be some sort of absurdity superweapon that would end the threat.

Personally I would have prefered if that piece of rubbish we have absolutely no logical reason to build, let alone use and rely on was just completely retconed. Gathering the galaxy to fight together and achieving impossible peace results, as well as negotiate treaties and alliances believed to be impossible is FAR more satisfying than building a superweapon that solves the impossible problem in a snap.

Nothing special about our cycle or Shepard. In the end a weapon designed by who knows what, for who knows what reason, for who knows how long ago, in who knows what language, ends the threat. Please tell me why the original designers of this technology couldn't beat the reapers. Exactly what messed up race could design the basics of a superweapon that does what the crucible does, covering the entire fricken galaxy, and not defeat the reapers?!

I hate superweapons in writing, they are almost always bad, but this was just...

[ahandsomeshark]

xsdob wrote...

mmmpollo wrote...

xsdob wrote...

I wouldn't becasue that raises the giant plot hole of how 1 billion years worth of species could all fail and somehow this cycle doesn't.

After ME1, how did this cycle differ from every other cycle?  Reapers lost control of the keepers and thus couldn't control the citadel to disable the mass relays.  This galaxy is united while previous cycles were completely cut off.  They could've really drove home that motif of strength through unity, only together can we destroy the Reapers.  Cooperate, get a really big army, wreck the Reapers.

I suppose, but using never before used tactics and technology isn't conventional warfare, it's innpvative warfare.

But I see your point and I concied to it. That pretty much pulls the plug on that one.

Yeah I don't think people actually mean completely conventional when they say conventional. They just mean more conventional than a magic off button.

[SoloPala]

Optimystic_X wrote...

SoloPala wrote...

If a giant worm and some ground based missiles kill a reaper, conventional victory isn't a crazy idea, especially with the revelation that reapers are vulnerable when firing their main weapon, and the addition of reaper based weapon tech on ships from studying Sovereign, while denying them control of the relays and the citadel which they always did previously.

They needed "the mother of all thresher maws" and an orbital strike just to kill two Destroyers.

Its still a giant worm, and orbital strikes do less damage than they would if it was still just space to space, also used the weakness that reapers are weak when charging their weapons.  Same tactic used to kill the reaper on earth, 2 missiles drop his gaurd, a second barrage finishes him off, again, theres no reason these tactics couldn't be used in general warfare.

Modifié par SoloPala, 03 mai 2012 - 06:27 .

[Mushufasa1512]

I would have definitely preferred a more "conventional" victory. Part of the reason space kid was so jarring was there seemed to be nothing like it in the previous games. Problems were solved by shooting or talking, not by jumping into giant laser beams and rewriting life. A victory achieved through strength of arms or some type of clever strategy would have just fit better than making a god level decision at the end.

[bluewolv1970]

SoloPala wrote...

Optimystic_X wrote...

SoloPala wrote...

If a giant worm and some ground based missiles kill a reaper, conventional victory isn't a crazy idea, especially with the revelation that reapers are vulnerable when firing their main weapon, and the addition of reaper based weapon tech on ships from studying Sovereign, while denying them control of the relays and the citadel which they always did previously.

They needed "the mother of all thresher maws" and an orbital strike just to kill two Destroyers.

Its still a giant worm, and orbital strikes do less damage than they would if it was still just space to space, also used the weakness that reapers are weak when charging their weapons.  Same tactic used to kill the reaper on earth, 2 missiles drop his gaurd, a second barrage finishes him off, again, theres no reason these tactics couldn't be used in general warfare.

not to mention that TIM proved (like it or not) alliance could coop reaper ground forces (using Cerberus Techonology)...allowing more resources on air defense...

[Reorte]

I would've liked a partially conventional victory. By this I mean that instead of some magic Reaper-ending device the Crucible was something that would give the galaxy enough of an edge to defeat the Reapers. I'd even be happy in that case if the game didn't end with the Reaper defeat but at the right point to show that it was very possible. Even with their known weaknesses the Reapers are still, IMO, too strong and numerous to be defeated without something extra and therefore a straightforward defeat would've cheapened them (but not as much as the Catalyst did).

[PsyrenY]

SoloPala wrote...

Its still a giant worm, and orbital strikes do less damage than they would if it was still just space to space, also used the weakness that reapers are weak when charging their weapons.  Same tactic used to kill the reaper on earth, 2 missiles drop his gaurd, a second barrage finishes him off, again, theres no reason these tactics couldn't be used in general warfare.

3 destroyers then. Whoopty-do?

[b2smooth]

Plus, to add to the thought that we could win a conventional war with the Reapers, this cycles AI race the Geth are actually helping us. In the previous cycles, with the limited info we are give, we are led to believe this hadn't happened before.

[ThatDancingTurian]

I would have loved that kind of ending. In fact, I expected that kind of ending before we got the game. Why didn't we get that kind of ending?

[shadowreflexion]

 Fighting on all fronts would have extended the gameplay immeasurably. Going from system to system taken the fight to the Reapers would have beeReaper to tell its friends you're coming for them? That would have been a glorious way to finally use a Cain on Harbinger and if we both died in the process then so be it. The war would have been won on my terms.

[SoloPala]

Optimystic_X wrote...

SoloPala wrote...

Its still a giant worm, and orbital strikes do less damage than they would if it was still just space to space, also used the weakness that reapers are weak when charging their weapons.  Same tactic used to kill the reaper on earth, 2 missiles drop his gaurd, a second barrage finishes him off, again, theres no reason these tactics couldn't be used in general warfare.

3 destroyers then. Whoopty-do?

You're not getting it 2 of those 3 were killed with a MASSIVE GAPING HOLE OF A WEAKNESS, one that every ship in the fleet could have exploited to an easy victory.

[mauro2222]

Optimystic_X wrote...

SoloPala wrote...

If a giant worm and some ground based missiles kill a reaper, conventional victory isn't a crazy idea, especially with the revelation that reapers are vulnerable when firing their main weapon, and the addition of reaper based weapon tech on ships from studying Sovereign, while denying them control of the relays and the citadel which they always did previously.

They needed "the mother of all thresher maws" and an orbital strike just to kill two Destroyers.

But a Cain to bring down another destroyer, or a couple of thanix cannons to bring down a capital class?

Even the Turians in a sucide attack destroyed a bunch of Sovereign class Reaper. With conventional cannons.

Modifié par mauro2222, 03 mai 2012 - 06:49 .

[Ticonderoga117]

Two versions of a conventional victory are possible. Kill the Reapers with "lots of Dakka!"
Or, tell the Catalyst to stuff if logic and leave us alone and tell him to police another galaxy.

However, if this isn't possible (due to the writers trading in their brains and filling in the gap with shiny things around the office) let me use the Destroy ending without killing anything else BUT the Reapers. The Citadel is the focusing and tuning mechanism, the Crucible is the battery. How well the battery is made does not determine how "effective" the tuning is.

[Oldbones2]

I would have.

Frankly, seeing the true horror of war and the real cost of being a leader (sacrificing lives to save others, making the hard choice, etc.)

It would have been epic.

[Ticonderoga117]

Oldbones2 wrote...

I would have.

Frankly, seeing the true horror of war and the real cost of being a leader (sacrificing lives to save others, making the hard choice, etc.)

It would have been epic.

Not to mention a much better moral take than... whatever the ending we got was supposed to convey.

[TheShadowWolf911]

if a giant worm can kill a reaper, i think that a conventional victory if possible somehow.

[FodoSatoru]

I can't imagine what giant worms would want you to do in order to earn their support in the warfare againt the Reapers. But I admit it challange players who chose the survivor of Akuze background: can they fight off resentment towards giant worms and work with them for the greater good? Also, are there worms sufficiently giant to defeat Sovereign-class reaper?

[ed87]

Just make it the full renegade ending, and everyone will be happy.

[Geneaux486]

You know what'd be more magical to a child?

"Do you see that region of space? There live the Asari. Over in that area are the Krogan." etc. etc.

So?

Sigh....

Retconing in and of itself isn't automatically a bad thing.  Its what they retconned it too which is atrocious.

But they didn't retcon it to anything, they filled in what was previously a blank space in our knowlege of the Reapers.  The atrocity thereof is a matter of opinion, one I happen to disagree with.

 

[Ytook]

Me, what is the point in building up forces if the strength of your forces doesn't matter, even of the crucible resolution had been good it would still make building up forces irrelevant, without a conventional victory then there is no sensical way of having a 'sliding scale' ending which me3 direly needs in my opinion.