277 réponses à ce sujet

[wryterra]

Seival wrote...

Mobius-Silent wrote...

Seival wrote...

All Reaper tech is half-organic remember? And biotic-amps are cybernetic devices. Shepard just got 45km-long external amp instead of 4,5sm-long internal one...

...Finally, the explosion starts only after Shepard activates the process, not before.

"All reaper tech is half organic" This is just patently wrong. There is a definitelike between the implants and the organic bits. 

The Citadel and Mass Relays are half-organic constructs, just like any Reaper ship.

The problem with this theory is that the citadel, mass relays and reaper ships are not at all half-organic. Or even part-organic. 

Other than that, it's great. 

[Seival]

wryterra wrote...

Seival wrote...

Mobius-Silent wrote...

Seival wrote...

All Reaper tech is half-organic remember? And biotic-amps are cybernetic devices. Shepard just got 45km-long external amp instead of 4,5sm-long internal one...

...Finally, the explosion starts only after Shepard activates the process, not before.

"All reaper tech is half organic" This is just patently wrong. There is a definitelike between the implants and the organic bits. 

The Citadel and Mass Relays are half-organic constructs, just like any Reaper ship.

The problem with this theory is that the citadel, mass relays and reaper ships are not at all half-organic. Or even part-organic. 

Other than that, it's great. 

Well, actually I don't see any problem even if the Citadel and Relays are 100% non-organic. Crucible can turn the Citadel and Relays into the enormous biotic amp even in this case.

EDIT: Oh, and at least Reaper ships are actually half-organic for sure. Remember ME2? EDI talking about proto-reaper.

Modifié par Seival, 10 juin 2012 - 11:40 .

[M Hedonist]

Seival wrote...

Well, actually I don't see any problem even if the Citadel and Relays are 100% non-organic. Crucible can turn the Citadel and Relays into the enormous biotic amp even in this case.

This leads me to questioning your sanity.
Why would you even make something up like the Citadel being half-organic if it's completely pointless to everything?
You fried my brain with that.

Modifié par Sauruz, 10 juin 2012 - 11:40 .

[Seival]

Sauruz wrote...

Seival wrote...

Well, actually I don't see any problem even if the Citadel and Relays are 100% non-organic. Crucible can turn the Citadel and Relays into the enormous biotic amp even in this case.

This leads me to questioning your sanity.
Why would you even make something up like the Citadel being half-organic if it's completely pointless to everything?
You fried my brain with that.

It's just some interesting thoughts. How can they be pointless?

[M Hedonist]

Seival wrote...

Sauruz wrote...

Seival wrote...

Well, actually I don't see any problem even if the Citadel and Relays are 100% non-organic. Crucible can turn the Citadel and Relays into the enormous biotic amp even in this case.

This leads me to questioning your sanity.
Why would you even make something up like the Citadel being half-organic if it's completely pointless to everything?
You fried my brain with that.

It's just some interesting thoughts. How can they be pointless?

Because they don't add anything interesting or valuable to the story and just make things needlessly convoluted. Just like the Catalyst being the Reaper King.

[Seival]

Sauruz wrote...

Seival wrote...

Sauruz wrote...

Seival wrote...

Well, actually I don't see any problem even if the Citadel and Relays are 100% non-organic. Crucible can turn the Citadel and Relays into the enormous biotic amp even in this case.

This leads me to questioning your sanity.
Why would you even make something up like the Citadel being half-organic if it's completely pointless to everything?
You fried my brain with that.

It's just some interesting thoughts. How can they be pointless?

Because they don't add anything interesting or valuable to the story and just make things needlessly convoluted. Just like the Catalyst being the Reaper King.

Maybe they don't add something interesting or valuable for you, but please don't speak for everyone.

[Mobius-Silent]

Ok lets be clear about this:
The Crucible uses Eezo and Mass Effect technology and some previously unknown implementations of dark energy. The Citadel used Eezo in much the same way as the Mass Relays but on a larger scale and in a controlling capacity.

The Crucible is not bio-organic, hence it's effect is not biotic. The Keepers dissolve into a protein soup when probed, there is no mention of Eezo present in their remains hence we can assume there is no Eezo in them. Hence they are not Biotic, and they can use the Citadel relay hence the Relay is not biotic.

The Reapers Bio-organic parts are enconced in non-organic shell (When Sovereign explodes you can see the pink mush covered in wires inside it, the model is also available in-engine) We do not see any of this pink mush in the Citadel other than the Processing rooms (Which we know are not usually active when the relay opens)

Biotic Amps don't use Eezo they just synchronise the use of the Eezo in the Biotic's brain.

Hence the majority or the effect that the Crucible+Citadel enacts can not be described as "Biotic" if _any_ of it's effect can be described as "Biotic" it must be small enough that it does not affect the outcome of the story and hence is not useful to us.

Modifié par Mobius-Silent, 11 juin 2012 - 10:15 .

[o Ventus]

1. It's silly to assume every single civilization before ours had biotics.

2. What if you're one of the classes that doesn't have biotics? Engineer, Soldier, Infiltrator... none of them are biotic. The bonus powers aren't canon, and only serve gameplay purposes.

3. That doesn't explain how shooting a glass tube encasing a bunch of cables destroys the Reapers. Or... anything, for that matter.

4. How in the unholy hell does this allow for Synthesis?

5. Then Shepard has either murdered or enslaved every single biotic in the galaxy.

[M Hedonist]

Seival wrote...

Maybe they don't add something interesting or valuable for you, but please don't speak for everyone.

No. This isn't about opinions. The Catalyst turning out to control the Reapers does more harm to the story than it makes it more interesting. The plot of the first game now makes no sense.
Similarly, the Citadel turning out to be half-organic would only do harm to the story. You can't just add random things to the story without considering first whether it fits into the story. It's this same attitude that caused the devs to put in the Catalyst without putting in any explanation why he didn't interfere in the plot of ME1.
Everybody has his own opinion, but your opinion is simply wrong. You can't just say "DEMs make the story better" or "adding more things to the story make it more interesting". You have to judge each element and each story on its own.

[Mobius-Silent]

Sauruz wrote...
...The Catalyst turning out to control the Reapers does more harm to the story than it makes it more interesting. The plot of the first game now makes no sense.

As an aside:

While I _completely_ agree with your assessment (The rubbishing of the ME1 plot is my #1 problem with the current ending) I'd like to offer up something I found interesting:

In the second leaked script (the one that was 90% the same as what we ended up getting) The conversation with the Catalyst is a little different, and while it still messes with the plot of ME1 it does offer an interesting potential get-out-clause:

In that leaked script the Catalyst loses control of the reapers the moment the Crucible connects, so all the time that Shepard is up there making a decision the Reapers are running around uncontrolled and the Catalyst is _worried_ about this. this suggests that the Reapers _want to_ act outside of the bounds of "The Cycle" Once you factor that in you suddenly have a reason that the Reapers might not want to "wake" the Catalyst which gives us a good reason to explain why it may have been "asleep" during ME1.

Mass Speculation:

Just imagine if the whole husk/collector/ravager/harvester/marauder/banshee thing is _just_ on the boundary of what the Catalyst will allow and the Reapers are worried about losing more of their own in open warfare hence _really want_ to keep their bio-organic abominations. Also what if they have a bit of a superiority complex about who they want making new Reapers? Whereas the Catalyst wants all advanced organics "Ascended" If there is a big fight then the Reapers get to create troops out of the "less desirables" whereas the more smoothly it goes the more "undesirable" races the Reapers have to fold into their own. Maybe that explains the Geth and/or messing with Cerberus, trying to force a manageable fight (and get us to fight each-other) so they have an excuse to eliminate everything they feel isn't "worthy" without the Catalyst yanking on their leash.

Maybe that explains their obsession with humanity/Earth they want to get their human Reaper made as quickly as possible so they can say "Look, we tried, we have what we think is the best, now let us wipe out the rest, they really are too much trouble, and we don't like the way they taste"

Modifié par Mobius-Silent, 11 juin 2012 - 10:17 .

[Seival]

Sauruz wrote...

Seival wrote...

Maybe they don't add something interesting or valuable for you, but please don't speak for everyone.

No. This isn't about opinions. The Catalyst turning out to control the Reapers does more harm to the story than it makes it more interesting. The plot of the first game now makes no sense.
Similarly, the Citadel turning out to be half-organic would only do harm to the story. You can't just add random things to the story without considering first whether it fits into the story. It's this same attitude that caused the devs to put in the Catalyst without putting in any explanation why he didn't interfere in the plot of ME1.
Everybody has his own opinion, but your opinion is simply wrong. You can't just say "DEMs make the story better" or "adding more things to the story make it more interesting". You have to judge each element and each story on its own.

This thread have a theory about the Crucible, not a suggestion. We will see if I was right about the Crucible or not later. But the main point of the thread is to support BioWare's work.

Some people like the endings as they are. Some people want the endings to be extended with keeping the main idea. Some people prefer to see completely new endings... You've just confirmed that you belong to the third group, and don't respect others opinions once more. And this will achieve nothing.

[M Hedonist]

Just make a DEM support thread already. I'm tired of arguing against your crazy theories after you've stopped responding to any of my comments in the Normandy Crash thread. Honestly, I don't even care anymore after we've proven that your theories are extremely improbable. Your naive stance on art and literature is upsetting me much more than anything else at the moment.

Modifié par Sauruz, 11 juin 2012 - 11:30 .

[Seival]

Sauruz wrote...

Just make a DEM support thread already. I'm tired of arguing against your crazy theories after you've stopped responding to any of my comments in the Normandy Crash thread. Honestly, I don't even care anymore after we've proven that your theories are extremely improbable. Your naive stance on art and literature is upsetting me much more than anything else at the moment.

Indirectly this is a DEM support thread. No need to create one more thread I think.

[M Hedonist]

Great. The Crucible is not strictly speaking a DEM, but whatever. Let's start by quoting myself from one of your other threads.

Sauruz wrote...

That kind of story telling is bad. If the ending is "completely unpredictable" and isn't connected to the rest of the story in any way it shouldn't even be there. It's what you do when you've written yourself into a situation that you don't know how to fix with the given characters and tools within your story. So you just suddenly invent some new crap. It leaves the reader with an unsatisfied feeling as none of the given characters and rules of the setting helped resolving the situation.
Seriously. Just ask anybody who knows anything about literature.

Modifié par Sauruz, 11 juin 2012 - 12:24 .

[Jenonax]

Sauruz wrote...

Great. The Crucible is not strictly speaking a DEM, but whatever. Let's start by quoting myself from one of your other threads.

<_<

.... yes it is.  

Come on now, dude, your making the most sense on any of these threads.  Don't throw it away now.

[Seival]

Sauruz wrote...

Great. The Crucible is not strictly speaking a DEM, but whatever. Let's start by quoting myself from one of your other threads.

Sauruz wrote...

That kind of story telling is bad. If the ending is "completely unpredictable" and isn't connected to the rest of the story in any way it shouldn't even be there. It's what you do when you've written yourself into a situation that you don't know how to fix with the given characters and tools within your story. So you just suddenly invent some new crap. It leaves the reader with an unsatisfied feeling as none of the given characters and rules of the setting helped resolving the situation.
Seriously. Just ask anybody who knows anything about literature.

Properly written DEM doesn't work like that. Connections to the rest of the story are not obvious. So you just need to find them yourself. DEM is phylosophical, and force you to think. That was the point of the Crucible and the Catalist.

[The Night Mammoth]

Seival wrote...

Sauruz wrote...

Great. The Crucible is not strictly speaking a DEM, but whatever. Let's start by quoting myself from one of your other threads.

Sauruz wrote...

That kind of story telling is bad. If the ending is "completely unpredictable" and isn't connected to the rest of the story in any way it shouldn't even be there. It's what you do when you've written yourself into a situation that you don't know how to fix with the given characters and tools within your story. So you just suddenly invent some new crap. It leaves the reader with an unsatisfied feeling as none of the given characters and rules of the setting helped resolving the situation.
Seriously. Just ask anybody who knows anything about literature.

Properly written DEM doesn't work like that. Connections to the rest of the story are not obvious. So you just need to find them yourself. DEM is phylosophical, and force you to think. That was the point of the Crucible and the Catalist.

You realize that there's no such thing as a 'properly written DEM'?

When you call something a DEM, it is because it is devoid of all the things usual literary conventions should have, like foreshadowing. 

[Mobius-Silent]

Sauruz wrote...
Great. The Crucible is not strictly speaking a DEM, but whatever.

Indeed, the Crucible is a "MacGuffin" the _Catalyst_ is a DEM given that the resolution would simply not have happened without it and prior to the elevator of light it was completely unheard of in the Mass Effect series.

There is no "good" way to impliment a DEM, its very invocation is an act of criticism the term in inherently negative. if the intervention in the story is expected or foreshadowed or "Hidden in plain sight" then the intervention is not a DEM

[Peranor]

"Properly written DEM", good one

[M Hedonist]

Seival wrote...

Properly written DEM doesn't work like that. Connections to the rest of the story are not obvious. So you just need to find them yourself. DEM is phylosophical, and force you to think. That was the point of the Crucible and the Catalist.

If a DEM has some kind of connection to the rest of the story, it is so obscure that it comes completely out of the blue. A DEM is by its very defintion the sudden introduction of new elements to resolve the situation. Or somebody suddenly gains new powers or something like that. If those elements were already there before the DEM, it is not a DEM.
And introducing philosophical themes into your work is not always good. You cannot make such generalisations. A DEM is only good in very specific kinds of work. Works where themes are more important than practicality and authenticity. Mass Effect simply is not that kind of work. It was always about choices and consequences, characters, motivations of these characters and how you deal with these characters.
However, once the Catalyst is introduced, none of these matter anymore. You cannot make an informed choice without knowing the consequences, which are never shown, the Catalyst overshadows every other character in the series, motivations don't make sense and the only way to deal with the Catalyst is to accept his logic and take one of the solutions which all follow the Catalyst's way of thinking that organics and synthetics cannot coexist without intervention.

[Seival]

The Night Mammoth wrote...

Seival wrote...

Sauruz wrote...

Great. The Crucible is not strictly speaking a DEM, but whatever. Let's start by quoting myself from one of your other threads.

Sauruz wrote...

That kind of story telling is bad. If the ending is "completely unpredictable" and isn't connected to the rest of the story in any way it shouldn't even be there. It's what you do when you've written yourself into a situation that you don't know how to fix with the given characters and tools within your story. So you just suddenly invent some new crap. It leaves the reader with an unsatisfied feeling as none of the given characters and rules of the setting helped resolving the situation.
Seriously. Just ask anybody who knows anything about literature.

Properly written DEM doesn't work like that. Connections to the rest of the story are not obvious. So you just need to find them yourself. DEM is phylosophical, and force you to think. That was the point of the Crucible and the Catalist.

You realize that there's no such thing as a 'properly written DEM'?

When you call something a DEM, it is because it is devoid of all the things usual literary conventions should have, like foreshadowing. 

There is such thing as "'properly written DEM", and ME3 have already proven that. As I already said, DEM endings just need more time to be understood, than standard holywood endings.

Modifié par Seival, 11 juin 2012 - 01:15 .

[Joe Del Toro]

It proper kills me when Seival says 'yeah but I believe/I think this happened' then later follows up with 'As I have already proven...' That's not how arguments, debate or...conversation in general works.

[The Night Mammoth]

Seival wrote...

There is such thing as "'properly written DEM",

Well no, there's not. It's not a DEM if it's 'properly written'. A DEM is specifically something that's not properly written. 

and ME3 have already proven that.

Well no, it hasn't. 

ME3 has just given another example of what not to do, evident by the reaction of the fans. 

As I already said, DEM endings just need more time to be understood,

I really don't know what that means. There's nothing complicated about a DEM, it's incredibly simple........ that's how you know it's a DEM. 

And you realize the game's been out for over three months now? 

This bullsh*t about 'taking longer to understand' isn't holding water anymore. I've been arguing about this fiasco for that entire period, and I'm no closer to understanding certain parts, because there's just not enough to make a basis for a conclusion. 

than standard holywood endings.

Okay. 

How is that related? No one has mentioned 'holllywood endings', so it's seems obvious you're implying something about the people who are arguing against you. 

Modifié par The Night Mammoth, 11 juin 2012 - 01:25 .

[Jenonax]

Seival wrote...


There is such thing as "'properly written DEM", and ME3 have already proven that. As I already said, DEM endings just need more time to be understood, than standard holywood endings.

No. No, no, no.

There is no such thing as a good DEM.  By its very definition it cannot ever be well written.  It is defined as a plot device that comes completely out of nowhere, with absolutely no connection to any part of the previous narrative.  It is defined as a bad plot device, therefore it can never be a good one.

If something happens in the narrative that comes a little out of the blue but works and is therefore good, then it is not a DEM its called foreshadowing.  

Foreshadowing = good plot device

DEM = bad plot device.  There are no exceptions, no matter how much you want there to be.

This is a proven literary technique that no one in the literary world, in their right, sane mind would do, because its cheating.  Because it says that you were so lazy and incompetent that you couldn't come up with a natural conclusion to the conflict you are portraying.

Modifié par Jenonax, 11 juin 2012 - 01:24 .