4520 réponses à ce sujet

[Jadebaby]

1000 post!

PS - I don't like control because it doesn't stop the Reapers. Period.

Modifié par Jade8aby88, 01 juin 2012 - 11:34 .

[incinerator950]

[Seival]

Jade8aby88 wrote...

1000 post!

PS - I don't like control because it doesn't stop the Reapers. Period.

Each ending stops the Reapers. Different endings just provide different ways to stop the Reapers.

[killage_wizard]

Seival wrote...

The Angry One wrote...

And how is a human going to impose their will onto thousands of these Reaper minds again without it backfiring horribly?

Mass Effect deserves better than space magic. Do you think this ending would've flown in ME1? Hell no. 

This is not a "space magic", this is "Deus Ex Machina" concept: "God From the Machine" is a plot device whereby a seemingly unsolvable problem is suddenly and abruptly solved with the contrived and unexpected intervention of some new event, character, ability, or object.

BioWare implemented DEM concept in ME3 just perfectly.

So yes Deus Ex Machina is basically a nice way of saying we don't know how to end this, so...space magic.  Its a terrible literary tool because it ignores everything that takes place before it.  Essentially it kicks everything you did perviously in the nuts so hard it you lose your suspension of disbelief.   You go from being immersed in a rich, well thought out story to rolling your eyes because of an AI who has seen Contact too many times making you choose a color for no reason.

Modifié par killage_wizard, 01 juin 2012 - 11:58 .

[Seival]

killage_wizard wrote...

Seival wrote...

The Angry One wrote...

And how is a human going to impose their will onto thousands of these Reaper minds again without it backfiring horribly?

Mass Effect deserves better than space magic. Do you think this ending would've flown in ME1? Hell no. 

This is not a "space magic", this is "Deus Ex Machina" concept: "God From the Machine" is a plot device whereby a seemingly unsolvable problem is suddenly and abruptly solved with the contrived and unexpected intervention of some new event, character, ability, or object.

BioWare implemented DEM concept in ME3 just perfectly.

So yes Deus Ex Machina is basically a nice way of saying we don't know how to end this, so...space magic.  Its a terrible literary tool because it ignores everything that takes place before it.  Essentially it kicks everything you did perviously in the nuts so hard it you lose your suspension of disbelief.   You go from being immersed in a rich, well thought out story to rolling your eyes because of an AI who has seen Contact too many times making you choose a color for no reason.

Deus Ex Machina is the excellent literary tool actually. It makes the ending unpredictable. Because the tool shows itself in action in the very end, and gives you an ability to stop some threat in a way you previousely convinced was impossible... and/or gives you an obvious option that will cost you something you most likely don't want to give.

BioWare was right about choosing DEM concept for ME3. The Trilogy would be too standard without such endings... Too videogamish...

Modifié par Seival, 01 juin 2012 - 01:09 .

[NoSpin]

Seival wrote...



Deus Ex Machina is the excellent literary tool actually. It makes the ending unpredictable. Because the tool shows itself in action in the very end, and gives you an ability to stop some threat in a way you previousely convinced was impossible... and/or gives you an obvious option that will cost you something you most likely don't want to give.

What? I don't know who your Lit teacher was, but that is a tad crazy. A very (very very) good writer can utilize a Deus Ex Machina in a way that isn't contrived and still leaves the reader satisfied. But if your last name isn't Tolkien, Dickens, Asimov, or Bradbury, it will most likely come off as using a get out of jail free card. Which is how it came off here. Great writers have a hard time pulling a Deus Ex Machina off, so it is a technique to stay away from if you have any doubt at all.

[Seival]

NoSpin wrote...

Seival wrote...



Deus Ex Machina is the excellent literary tool actually. It makes the ending unpredictable. Because the tool shows itself in action in the very end, and gives you an ability to stop some threat in a way you previousely convinced was impossible... and/or gives you an obvious option that will cost you something you most likely don't want to give.

What? I don't know who your Lit teacher was, but that is a tad crazy. A very (very very) good writer can utilize a Deus Ex Machina in a way that isn't contrived and still leaves the reader satisfied. But if your last name isn't Tolkien, Dickens, Asimov, or Bradbury, it will most likely come off as using a get out of jail free card. Which is how it came off here. Great writers have a hard time pulling a Deus Ex Machina off, so it is a technique to stay away from if you have any doubt at all.

Why am I satisfied then? I was as confused as many others, but shock has ended. And now I only want the endings to be explained in more details. I don't want them to be remade anymore. I love the concept as it is... And I have a feeling, that I'm not the only one.

... I wanna thank BioWare for all their patience, and incredible resistance to all unconstructive criticism and whining.

[killage_wizard]

Seival wrote...
... I wanna thank BioWare for all their patience, and incredible resistance to all unconstructive criticism and whining.

Incredible resistance to all uncronstructive criticism and whining?  If Bioware truly believed in their ending they wouldn't be releasing an EC in the first place.

[killage_wizard]

Seival wrote...

Jade8aby88 wrote...

1000 post!

PS - I don't like control because it doesn't stop the Reapers. Period.

Each ending stops the Reapers. Different endings just provide different ways to stop the Reapers.

Synthesis gives the Reapers an outright win.  Forcefully changing the evolutionary direction of a species is exactly what they are trying to do by either destroying or assimilating (synthesis).

[Jackums]

killage_wizard wrote...

Seival wrote...

Jade8aby88 wrote...

1000 post!

PS - I don't like control because it doesn't stop the Reapers. Period.

Each ending stops the Reapers. Different endings just provide different ways to stop the Reapers.

Synthesis gives the Reapers an outright win.  Forcefully changing the evolutionary direction of a species is exactly what they are trying to do by either destroying or assimilating (synthesis).

The only "goal" of the Reapers is to prevent technological singularity. Their win = a win for all organics. Their aim was never to commit genocide, or to control organics. They were just the Reapers' methods of, again, preventing a technological singularity. The Reapers are not malevolent beings. They're tools of the Catalyst with a long-term beneficial purpose (assuming a TS was an inevtiable occurrence, but that's a whole different debate).

[Ageless Face]

killage_wizard wrote...

Seival wrote...
... I wanna thank BioWare for all their patience, and incredible resistance to all unconstructive criticism and whining.

Incredible resistance to all uncronstructive criticism and whining?  If Bioware truly believed in their ending they wouldn't be releasing an EC in the first place.

BioWare acknowledges their fans. No ending of a game (at least that I know of) has ever had such a crazy reaction over it. But if they were not proud of the ending, they would have told us they were going to rewrite the ending- and they didn't. They only told us they will release clarification. BioWare knows that if they will not release the EC, a lot of pissed off fans will stop being their fans. 

Modifié par HagarIshay, 01 juin 2012 - 02:16 .

[Seival]

killage_wizard wrote...

Seival wrote...

Jade8aby88 wrote...

1000 post!

PS - I don't like control because it doesn't stop the Reapers. Period.

Each ending stops the Reapers. Different endings just provide different ways to stop the Reapers.

Synthesis gives the Reapers an outright win.  Forcefully changing the evolutionary direction of a species is exactly what they are trying to do by either destroying or assimilating (synthesis).

I don't like the Synthesis too. I also think it indeed looks like surrendering. But it also isn't the Reapers's win. Without the Catalist Reapers are just uncontrolled tools. And with all organics and synthetics merged, Reapers just don't have anything to harvest or "protect". Turning everyone into hasks is a very exotic way to stop the Reapers, but it works regardless.

killage_wizard wrote...

Seival wrote...
... I wanna thank BioWare for all their patience, and incredible resistance to all unconstructive criticism and whining.

Incredible resistance to all uncronstructive criticism and whining?  If Bioware truly believed in their ending they wouldn't be releasing an EC in the first place.

BioWare just wanna please all players who prefers less thinking and more watching/listening. Also, they wanted to add an epilogue, remember? It was nice and constructive idea, suggested by fans. Epilogue will not affect the endings. They will remain the same. The only true problem right now is the Normandy Crash scene.

[The Night Mammoth]

Seival wrote...

BioWare just wanna please all players who prefers less thinking and more watching/listening.

You realize that it's the thinking about it part that makes people believe it's all sh*t, right? 

I find that notion rather insulting. 

Also, they wanted to add an epilogue, remember? It was nice and constructive idea, suggested by fans. Epilogue will not affect the endings.

Oh they will. There's nothing they can do now, the ending is going to change no matter how small. 

They will remain the same. The only true problem right now is the Normandy Crash scene.

There's more than just one problem. 

[killage_wizard]

JackumsD wrote...

killage_wizard wrote...

Seival wrote...

Jade8aby88 wrote...

1000 post!

PS - I don't like control because it doesn't stop the Reapers. Period.

Each ending stops the Reapers. Different endings just provide different ways to stop the Reapers.

Synthesis gives the Reapers an outright win.  Forcefully changing the evolutionary direction of a species is exactly what they are trying to do by either destroying or assimilating (synthesis).

The only "goal" of the Reapers is to prevent technological singularity. Their win = a win for all organics. Their aim was never to commit genocide, or to control organics. They were just the Reapers' methods of, again, preventing a technological singularity. The Reapers are not malevolent beings. They're tools of the Catalyst with a long-term beneficial purpose (assuming a TS was an inevtiable occurrence, but that's a whole different debate).

How is the destruction of organics via mass murder or synthesis a win for organics?  Genocide as a means does not justify the ends.  And a long term beneficial purpose to who?  For a species that will possibley become technologically advanced in the future?  By that definition every race is doomed to genocide via the Reapers at some point. What gives the catalyst the right to play god?

Modifié par killage_wizard, 01 juin 2012 - 02:25 .

[Ageless Face]

Seival wrote...

BioWare just wanna please all players who prefers less thinking and more watching/listening. Also, they wanted to add an epilogue, remember? It was nice and constructive idea, suggested by fans. Epilogue will not affect the endings. They will remain the same. The only true problem right now is the Normandy Crash scene.

I... would not agree that was the only problem. There is a need for thorough explanation about control and synthesis- let us know it surley can be done without hesitation. And the elevator is what bugs me the most, even more than the normandy crash. Too much unrealistic to me.  

[killage_wizard]

HagarIshay wrote...

killage_wizard wrote...

Seival wrote...
... I wanna thank BioWare for all their patience, and incredible resistance to all unconstructive criticism and whining.

Incredible resistance to all uncronstructive criticism and whining?  If Bioware truly believed in their ending they wouldn't be releasing an EC in the first place.

BioWare acknowledges their fans. No ending of a game (at least that I know of) has ever had such a crazy reaction over it. But if they were not proud of the ending, they would have told us they were going to rewrite the ending- and they didn't. They only told us they will release clarification. BioWare knows that if they will not release the EC, a lot of pissed off fans will stop being their fans. 

Most fans who hate the ending don't hate it because of the lack of clarification.  They hate it because it is fundamentally broken (or Deus Ex Machina'd).  Adding epilogue will only fuel the hatred unless the epilogue actually proves a certain theory that some people hate for some reason.

Modifié par killage_wizard, 01 juin 2012 - 02:31 .

[Jackums]

killage_wizard wrote...

JackumsD wrote...

killage_wizard wrote...

Seival wrote...

Jade8aby88 wrote...

1000 post!

PS - I don't like control because it doesn't stop the Reapers. Period.

Each ending stops the Reapers. Different endings just provide different ways to stop the Reapers.

Synthesis gives the Reapers an outright win.  Forcefully changing the evolutionary direction of a species is exactly what they are trying to do by either destroying or assimilating (synthesis).

The only "goal" of the Reapers is to prevent technological singularity. Their win = a win for all organics. Their aim was never to commit genocide, or to control organics. They were just the Reapers' methods of, again, preventing a technological singularity. The Reapers are not malevolent beings. They're tools of the Catalyst with a long-term beneficial purpose (assuming a TS was an inevtiable occurrence, but that's a whole different debate).

How is the destruction of organics via mass murder or synthesis a win for organics?  Genocide as a means does not justify the ends.  And a long term beneficial purpose to who?  For a species that will possibley become technologically advanced in the future?  By that definition every race is doomed to genocide via the Reapers at some point. What gives the catalyst the right to play god?

I never said their methods were a win for organics. I said the result of their methods (the prevention of a TS) is a win for organics, which I also clarified was under the assumption that a TS was inevitable without their intervention. I also never said the means justified the ends or that the Catalyst had any right to do anything.

I corrected you on your claim that the Reapers' goal was Synthesis, because it was not. Their goal was the prevention of a technological singularity; fact. That was the only point I was making.

[The Night Mammoth]

JackumsD wrote...

killage_wizard wrote...

Seival wrote...

Jade8aby88 wrote...

1000 post!

PS - I don't like control because it doesn't stop the Reapers. Period.

Each ending stops the Reapers. Different endings just provide different ways to stop the Reapers.

Synthesis gives the Reapers an outright win.  Forcefully changing the evolutionary direction of a species is exactly what they are trying to do by either destroying or assimilating (synthesis).

The only "goal" of the Reapers is to prevent technological singularity.

That's a fan explanation. 

Aside though, that opens up maybe three dozen other questions as to why they would, because a singularity isn't bad in and of itself, far from it. 

Their win = a win for all organics.

Not for the ones they just killed, obviously. 

Their aim was never to commit genocide, or to control organics.

And yet, they always do these things. Their cycle is a form of control. Their cycle is a means to commit genocide. 

They were just the Reapers' methods of, again, preventing a technological singularity. The Reapers are not malevolent beings. They're tools of the Catalyst with a long-term beneficial purpose (assuming a TS was an inevtiable occurrence, but that's a whole different debate).

They seem awfully malevolent when you actually talk to them. Their acts seem awfully malevolent. 

[killage_wizard]

Seival wrote...
BioWare just wanna please all players who prefers less thinking and more watching/listening. Also, they wanted to add an epilogue, remember? It was nice and constructive idea, suggested by fans. Epilogue will not affect the endings. They will remain the same. The only true problem right now is the Normandy Crash scene.

So the vast majority of people who hate the ending are idiots?  Because to me "players who prefer less thinking" is exactly what you imply by that statement.

[Ageless Face]

killage_wizard wrote...


Most fans who hate the ending don't hate it because of the lack of clarification.  They hate it because it is fundamentally broken (or Deus Ex Machina'd).  Adding epilogue will only fuel the hatred unless the epilogue actually proves a certain theory that some people hate for some reason.

Exactly. Many fans hate the ending to no end, but If BioWare would have realised their ending was truly bad and the fans are compleltey right, they would have caved in and would write a hole new ending. But they didn't. They continued with their work and they believe still that their ending is right. And I respect them for that. Even if I'm not a fan of the ending, if BioWare would rewrite it to what the fans want, they are not true artsits. They are just fan-puppet. 

Modifié par HagarIshay, 01 juin 2012 - 02:41 .

[Jackums]

@The Night Mammoth: Read my response to killage_wizard.

[killage_wizard]

JackumsD wrote...

I never said their methods were a win for organics. I said the result of their methods (the prevention of a TS) is a win for organics, which I also clarified was under the assumption that a TS was inevitable without their intervention. I also never said the means justified the ends or that the Catalyst had any right to do anything.

I corrected you on your claim that the Reapers' goal was Synthesis, because it was not. Their goal was the prevention of a technological singularity; fact. That was the only point I was making.

But if synthesis is a means to an end, then synthesis is a goal.  If they really wanted to prevent an TS couldn't they just hang around and kick the **** out of an evil race of A.I.'s if they tried to wipe out all the organics in the universe?  They could be gaurdians, but they choose to be murderers.

[killage_wizard]

HagarIshay wrote...

killage_wizard wrote...


Most fans who hate the ending don't hate it because of the lack of clarification.  They hate it because it is fundamentally broken (or Deus Ex Machina'd).  Adding epilogue will only fuel the hatred unless the epilogue actually proves a certain theory that some people hate for some reason.

Exactly. Many fans hate the ending to no end, but If BioWare would have realised their ending was truly bad and the fans are compleltey right, they would have caved in and would write a hole new ending. But they didn't. They continued with their work and they believe still that their ending is right. And I respect them for that. Even if I'm not a fan of the ending, if BioWare would rewrite it to what the fans want, they are not true artsits. They are just fan-puppet. 

To me just releasing an EC undermines their artisitc integrity.  Its one thing if they were going to release an EC whether the fan reaction was good or not, but they are only doing it because they are getting hammered for what they put out.  The end should be the end.

[Jackums]

killage_wizard wrote...

JackumsD wrote...

I never said their methods were a win for organics. I said the result of their methods (the prevention of a TS) is a win for organics, which I also clarified was under the assumption that a TS was inevitable without their intervention. I also never said the means justified the ends or that the Catalyst had any right to do anything.

I corrected you on your claim that the Reapers' goal was Synthesis, because it was not. Their goal was the prevention of a technological singularity; fact. That was the only point I was making.

But if synthesis is a means to an end, then synthesis is a goal.  If they really wanted to prevent an TS couldn't they just hang around and kick the **** out of an evil race of A.I.'s if they tried to wipe out all the organics in the universe?  They could be gaurdians, but they choose to be murderers.

No, they couldn't. A technological singularity is an event horizon. It's a point of no return. Once a TS occurs, that's it. You prevent it happening in the first place or you fail. There's no stopping it once it has happened. That's the whole reason for the Reapers' existence. And again, I'm not debating the morals of the Catalyst. I was simply correcting your notion that the Reapers' goal was Synthesis.

[Jackums]

Seival wrote...

... I wanna thank BioWare for all their patience, and incredible resistance to all unconstructive criticism and whining.

+1