319 réponses à ce sujet

[Rip504]

I was trying to show a friend the ending of ME3 today,got there and we decided to go red...
Then my Shepard just stood their unable to shoot his gun... I had to reload... Completely killed the experience... Bugs and glitches at end game,with an ending like this... He looked at me and asked me if I was joking or messing with Him... I just laughed hard.

[Catamantaloedis]

The Angry One wrote...

Catamantaloedis wrote...

I don't recall saying I was happy with the choices. I do recall saying that if you felt that Destroy was the right choice, then you should have taken it because sacrificing the geth is inconsequential.

Again, it is inconsequential to you. Stop imposing your character's beliefs on mine.

Then the only conclusion we can reach is that destroying the Reapers is not you main concern. Your main concern is preserving the galaxy, even if that means that the Reapers survive. Otherwise, you would just destroy the Reapers, or turn everyone into robot abominations.

Modifié par Catamantaloedis, 08 mai 2012 - 12:05 .

[Sarevok Synder]

The Angry One wrote...


Mass accelerator misfires. Every single shot that misses a Reaper is going to hit Earth. Remember, Sir Isaac Newton is the deadliest SOB in space.
Also, massive amount of debris both from the fleet and the Reapers and of course the Citadel.

But Angry, the fleet, Reapers and Citadel were destroyed in a "special" kind of way, just like the Relays. There is no debris. The mass accelerator rounds also now have "new" auto destruct features as well. You see, Bioware's thought of everything?

Yeah, EC is gonna be great...............

[The Angry One]

Catamantaloedis wrote...

Then the only conclusion we can reach is that destroying the Reapers is not you main concern. Your main concern is preserving the galaxy, even if that means that the Reapers survive. Otherwise, you would just destroy the Reapers, or turn everyone into robot abominations.

My main concern is destroying the Reapers *and* preserving the galaxy.
That was the entire point of all 3 games.

[111987]

The Angry One wrote...

Except humanity would still have it's fleets, it's military power intact.
Again, most of the people on Earth are going to die regardless in the endings, you've just made sure you took the galaxy with you.
Although perhaps that's your point.

I think it's economically where humans will be screwed without Earth. They still have a sizeable military but have zero means of maintaining it over the long run.

However I see your point about how most people will die anyways. I doubt the devs intended for that to be the case. I'm sure they'll just say on Twitter or something that there were no misfires, the Citadel was vaporized in orbit, etc...

[Anacronian Stryx]

ahandsomeshark wrote...

MisterJB wrote...

The Angry One wrote...
Look, I know you're in love with turning everyone into a husk, but stop talking nonsense.

Synthetic genocide is what you get for acting like a damned Neanderthal.

Yes because humans don't have several colonies elsewhere and several fleets, not to mention the galactic sympathy they'd earn for such an action.

The great majority of our population was on Earth. Even if we can keep a stabl number with out homeworld gone, the aliens are not going to let us keep our Council Seat out of the goodness of their hearts.
Sympathy means nothing in politics.

the great majority of earth is probably dead by the time you even get to the catalyst between weeks of reaper occupation and all the warfare, plus the whole citadel exploding in orbit thing.

still it should be remembered that if only 1% of the human population survives that is still 110 million, more people than lived in Europe in the middle ages.

[Reorte]

unoriginalname1133 wrote...

 Yes, that would be awesome. But I think this leads to a larger issue that extends from this: should there be a "golden" ending? That is, should there be an ending that works out well for everyone (except the Reapers. of course)? This proposal of destroying just the Reapers seems to at least come pretty close to this. I understnad why some wouldn't want this (why wouldn't you just pick this everytime?) but I personally would like to have the option. Make it insanely hard to get if you want, but I think having a happy ending should be possible if you work your butt off, preferrably with the option to achieve it as both a paragon or a renegade. Your personal decisions could still be reflected in the aftermath, so I can't think of why a player shouldn't be rewarded for hard work 

There should be one if it can be done plausibly. And losses should also be equally plausible. That's another reason the whole Big Anti-Reaper Button Device fails so miserably because any negative consequences (assuming that it works at all) are pretty much arbitrary. It's not like losing less because you've managed to gather a bigger fleet. It's causing collateral damage simply because someone has decided that things can't turn out too nice for you (even ignoring all the death and destruction that's already happened).

[Catamantaloedis]

The Angry One wrote...

Catamantaloedis wrote...

Then the only conclusion we can reach is that destroying the Reapers is not you main concern. Your main concern is preserving the galaxy, even if that means that the Reapers survive. Otherwise, you would just destroy the Reapers, or turn everyone into robot abominations.

My main concern is destroying the Reapers *and* preserving the galaxy.
That was the entire point of all 3 games.

Another point of all 3 games was making hard choices.

[MisterJB]

The Angry One wrote...
Neither, since I have not once said you should lose your ending, however much I detest synthesis.

Oh please, your first post on this thread was how Destroy is what most closely resembles what we have been fighting for since ME1.

[YNation913]

Well here's another question, what if the Reapers were shown getting thrown into the sun in control? Hopefully, the EC's "context" will be the addition of scenes that depict the geth not dying in destroy or the Reapers dying in control...

[The Angry One]

111987 wrote...

I think it's economically where humans will be screwed without Earth. They still have a sizeable military but have zero means of maintaining it over the long run.

For the sake of argument, wasn't Sol pretty much mined out anyway? Plus I think most of their infrastructure was elsewhere, like Arcturus. If that could be salvaged and rebuilt, perhaps with a new Arcturus Station and such it might not be too bad for them.

However I see your point about how most people will die anyways. I doubt the devs intended for that to be the case. I'm sure they'll just say on Twitter or something that there were no misfires, the Citadel was vaporized in orbit, etc...

Yeah and then they accuse us of wanting puppies and unicorns. Puppies and unicorns is when you manufacture a bright future in spite of the facts you've presented.

Modifié par The Angry One, 08 mai 2012 - 12:10 .

[Anacronian Stryx]

MisterJB wrote...

The Angry One wrote...
Neither, since I have not once said you should lose your ending, however much I detest synthesis.

Oh please, your first post on this thread was how Destroy is what most closely resembles what we have been fighting for since ME1.

This does not equates to saying there should be no synthisis ending.

[The Angry One]

MisterJB wrote...

The Angry One wrote...
Neither, since I have not once said you should lose your ending, however much I detest synthesis.

Oh please, your first post on this thread was how Destroy is what most closely resembles what we have been fighting for since ME1.

And it is. That was the entire point of Mass Effect. Kill the bad guys.
I guess that's "too simple" and "not artistic" for some. But that's how it is. Again, keep your husk empire, but let the rest of us get ending we want too.

[MisterJB]

The Angry One wrote...
LOL, yeah, killing the bad guys is such a terrible thing. Much better to keep them as they are or submit to their agenda.

Right, let us approach a very complex problem that has defined the Milky Way for billions of years in the most simplistic way possible. Blow sh*t up.
Just the fact that you are referring to the Reapers as "the bad guys" proves how short-sigthed you are being.

ThExcept humanity would still have it's fleets, it's military power intact.
Again, most of the people on Earth are going to die regardless in the endings, you've just made sure you took the galaxy with you.
Although perhaps that's your point.

That will depend on how many fleets we have lost. I seriously doubt the other species placed all their military power in the attack on Earth.
And most of the people on Earth are still a lot more numerous than the populations of our colonies. Also, how have I argued we should take the rest of the galaxy with us?

[Shallyah]

YNation913 wrote...

Well here's another question, what if the Reapers were shown getting thrown into the sun in control? Hopefully, the EC's "context" will be the addition of scenes that depict the geth not dying in destroy or the Reapers dying in control...

I keep seeing this nosense around. The Reapers aren't puppets, and incase you've missed it the three million times it was said during the three games, the most primal and core purpose of any synthetic lifeform is self-preservation. They may even give up on free will or really anything else to survive. Even wipe out their creators before accepting to be destroyed (Yep, you know the Quarians, don't you?). Plus each Reaper is independant, each a nation, if you believe Sovereign (whom I respect ten zillion times more than the last minute godchild).

You're not gonna Control the Reapers and make them fly into a sun, stop dreaming. Even if you managed to convince one to do so, the massive Mass Effect cores they have would explode in such a way that would most likely cause the star to Supernova, wiping the entire system. So much for "not killing anyone".

Modifié par Shallyah, 08 mai 2012 - 12:18 .

[Reorte]

Catamantaloedis wrote...

Another point of all 3 games was making hard choices.

Where necessary and not just for the sake of making hard decisions.

[MisterJB]

Anacronian Stryx wrote...
This does not equates to saying there should be no synthisis ending.

Correct but it equates to placing her Shepard's ideal in other people Shepard's.

[Anacronian Stryx]

MisterJB wrote...

Anacronian Stryx wrote...
This does not equates to saying there should be no synthisis ending.

Correct but it equates to placing her Shepard's ideal in other people Shepard's.

No it equates to exposing her feeling about her Shepard, If she actually said there should be no synthisis ending then she would be doing as you prescribe.

[Catamantaloedis]

Reorte wrote...

Catamantaloedis wrote...

Another point of all 3 games was making hard choices.

Where necessary and not just for the sake of making hard decisions.

Again. Not saying I'm happy how the choices were presented in this game. That doesn't mean the best soluton to the ending is that you just kill the Reapers. 

It should be something hard like deciding whether to save the Rachni Queen or curing the Genophage.

[Reorte]

MisterJB wrote...

Right, let us approach a very complex problem that has defined the Milky Way for billions of years in the most simplistic way possible. Blow sh*t up.
Just the fact that you are referring to the Reapers as "the bad guys" proves how short-sigthed you are being.

Blow up the sh*t that's the problem works well enough for me. That's the only real problem we know has defined the galaxy for billions of years. I'll take a possible risk over a definite one.

[KingZayd]

MisterJB wrote...

The Angry One wrote...
Neither, since I have not once said you should lose your ending, however much I detest synthesis.

Oh please, your first post on this thread was how Destroy is what most closely resembles what we have been fighting for since ME1.

And it isn't?  How this translates to you not being allowed to choose something else, I fail to see.

[The Angry One]

MisterJB wrote...

Right, let us approach a very complex problem that has defined the Milky Way for billions of years in the most simplistic way possible. Blow sh*t up.
Just the fact that you are referring to the Reapers as "the bad guys" proves how short-sigthed you are being.

They are the bad guys. They are genocidal maniacs who cause untold amounts of terror and suffering to their victims all for a broken and racist agenda.
The "simplistic way" is to defeat them. This has been the goal, this has been the opinion shown by every character aligned with Shepard in the entire trilogy.

Defeat the Reapers. Not compromise. Not submit.

That will depend on how many fleets we have lost. I seriously doubt the other species placed all their military power in the attack on Earth.

Max EMS pretty much suggests they did.

And most of the people on Earth are still a lot more numerous than the populations of our colonies.

Again they're mostly dead either way.

Also, how have I argued we should take the rest of the galaxy with us?

I'm just pointing out that this is what happens in all of the endings.

[Reorte]

Catamantaloedis wrote...

Again. Not saying I'm happy how the choices were presented in this game. That doesn't mean the best soluton to the ending is that you just kill the Reapers. 

It should be something hard like deciding whether to save the Rachni Queen or curing the Genophage.

Why? That still sounds like making a hard decision simply for the sake of making a hard decision. If a tough decision appears naturally out of the story then that's fine but I don't want contrived ones just to make the game look clever.

[Verit]

MisterJB wrote...
Just the fact that you are referring to the Reapers as "the bad guys" proves how short-sigthed you are being.

The games don't show us a single redeeming aspect to the Reapers. Not one.  So yes, they really are the bad guys, and the only trying to convince us otherwise is the "Reaper overmind" in the final 5 minutes of the game.

[YNation913]

Shallyah wrote...

YNation913 wrote...

Well here's another question, what if the Reapers were shown getting thrown into the sun in control? Hopefully, the EC's "context" will be the addition of scenes that depict the geth not dying in destroy or the Reapers dying in control...

I keep seeing this nosense around. The Reapers aren't puppets, and incase you've missed it the three million times it was said during the three games, the most primal and core purpose of any synthetic lifeform is self-preservation. They may even give up on free will or really anything else to survive. Even wipe out their creators before accepting to be destroyed (Yep, you know the Quarians, don't you?). Plus each Reaper is independant, each a nation, if you believe Sovereign (whom I respect ten zillion times more than the last minute godchild).

You're not gonna Control the Reapers and make them fly into a sun, stop dreaming. Even if you managed to convince one to do so, the massive Mass Effect cores they have would explode in such a way that would most likely cause the star to Supernova, wiping the entire system. So much for "not killing anyone".

Oh jeez, I forgot there were experts here.