The Catalyst doesn't consider turning a race into a Reaper as killing it. The idea is that race is being spared destruction in the conflict of any non-ascension worthy species. You must remember that the Catalyst is not bound by some moral code, like you. It does not feel, it calculates. Taking the form of the boy was likely a choice on the part of the catalyst to choose a form that would be familiar to Shepard much in the same way that the alien in Contact explained. It is also important to note that many of these are setup that way because the writers needed a device to deliver the exposition in the closing moments. Everything the Catalyst says is based on the idea that it has seen the repetition of creation, rebellion and destruction so often that it has determined that the only solution was to do what it does now. Shepard reaching the Catalyst proves to it that the plan is no longer viable. As a result, the Catalyst determines that Shepard shall choose the outcome and see how it unfolds from there. The fact that you make any choice does not mean you trust it, but simply take the only course of action granted to you...limiting to be sure, but no level of trust is implied unless you take the Control option.
Those who say the Catalyst is trustworthy: Explain why the Catalyst lies.
Débuté par
The Angry One
, juin 05 2012 01:36
Retour en haut
#427
Posté 07 juin 2012 - 01:16
KingZayd
-
- Members
- 5 344 messages
[quote]Geneaux486 wrote...
[quote]There is no way our characters would have accepted what was spooned fed to use by vent boy . Both paragon and renegade Shepards would never have followed what was clearily moronic ,illogical reasoning and vent boys solutions to the Reapers[/quote]
Shepard never indicates an acceptance of anything the Catalyst tells him or her. Shepard simply hears the thing out, then control is handed over to the player to make the final choice. Whether or not you accept anything the Catalyst says is up to you, the player, it is not determined by the in-game Shepard. It is your interpretation, period, and as such it's completely subjective. This in turn makes the assertion that Shepard somehow acts out of character false.
[/quote]
"So the illusive man was right"
[/quote]
[quote]There is no way our characters would have accepted what was spooned fed to use by vent boy . Both paragon and renegade Shepards would never have followed what was clearily moronic ,illogical reasoning and vent boys solutions to the Reapers[/quote]
Shepard never indicates an acceptance of anything the Catalyst tells him or her. Shepard simply hears the thing out, then control is handed over to the player to make the final choice. Whether or not you accept anything the Catalyst says is up to you, the player, it is not determined by the in-game Shepard. It is your interpretation, period, and as such it's completely subjective. This in turn makes the assertion that Shepard somehow acts out of character false.
[/quote]
"So the illusive man was right"
[/quote]
#428
Posté 07 juin 2012 - 01:20
KingZayd
-
- Members
- 5 344 messages
o Ventus wrote...
Geneaux486 wrote...
Legion spoke to the Reaper, made up of billions of organic minds, "conjoined and uploaded in immortal machine bodies".
I don't know how many times I need to mention this, but gestalt intelligences don't say "I" and "me" in reference to themselves as a collective.
Actually, in a lot of sci-fi, hive minds end up merging and becoming part of one larger personality over time.
In fact Legion does it himself. First the platform referred to itself as "we", then at then end it was "I"
Modifié par KingZayd, 07 juin 2012 - 01:23 .
#429
Posté 07 juin 2012 - 01:29
KingZayd
-
- Members
- 5 344 messages
Geneaux486 wrote...
Except we know that the Thorian consumed them, as it consumes Shia'la.3. It gained the knowledge of the prothean culture. It doesn't have any personal memories or prothean mannerisms, or they would have all gone to Shepard's brain. Shiala also never uses the word "essence". Again, we can do this in real life through fossil study. Just because we know how the velociraptor hunted doesn't make us all inherently half dinosaur.
Liara used the word "essence" and she experienced it first hand when helping Shepard to sort it out. The fact is that the Thorian consumed Protheans, and as such gained the Cipher, the essence of their race, which it was capable of sharing with other beings. This is fact, outright stated and observed in the game. That is all that matters as far as the point I was trying to make in bringing it up goes.
It possessed Shiala, it had access to her mind. It's likely the Thorian did the same with the Protheans, which is why it "knows" what it is to be a Prothean. Nothing to do with their genetics. That said, there are tons of organic minds in a reaper. The question is: what makes these races, upon being turned into a reaper, decide to work with the other reapers in pursuit of the same cause? do they really consider it to be an ascension? or is there something else at work here?
#430
Posté 07 juin 2012 - 01:48
Memnon
-
- Members
- 1 405 messages
What percentage of organics are harvested and 'transcended?' Is being turned into a husk transcending? It seems like the VAST majority of organics are outright killed, and a small percentage of them are harvested ... even if you believed that the consciousness of those harvested is still preserved (which I do not), you can't ignore the fact that it's a small percentage compared to those murdered ...
#431
Posté 07 juin 2012 - 02:03
Silhouett3
-
- Members
- 477 messages
Stornskar wrote...
What percentage of organics are harvested and 'transcended?' Is being turned into a husk transcending? It seems like the VAST majority of organics are outright killed, and a small percentage of them are harvested ... even if you believed that the consciousness of those harvested is still preserved (which I do not), you can't ignore the fact that it's a small percentage compared to those murdered ...
This is the "Harvesting" Codex entry:
"The rate of killing is phenomenal. Intelligence estimates suggest there are more than 400 processor ships on Earth, killing approximately 1.86 million humans per day. In combination with battlefield deaths, disease, and famine, this pace will result in the complete depopulation of Earth within a decade. As the husks and indoctrinated slaves build more slaughtering facilities, the kill rate can only increase."
And this is the "Fall of Earth":
"The capital ships bombarded defense installations and industrial centers, annihilating entire cities with populations in the low millions, including Adelaide, Hamburg, Al Jubail, and Fort Worth. Meanwhile, Reaper destroyers descended into the atmosphere to melt roads and capture population centers with minimal loss of life. This is not an example of the Reapers being merciful. More likely, they are herding their prey to make the coming harvest that much easier."
Modifié par Silhouett3, 07 juin 2012 - 02:07 .
#432
Posté 07 juin 2012 - 02:13
Geneaux486
-
- Members
- 2 248 messages
Not even close . that statement right there's shows you have a lack of understanding why so many people had issues with the ending , how far it was from the established lore and science of mass effect universe created
so know I understand why you can't comprehend it .
Once again, you respond to my citing of things we see and hear in the game itself with "You're wrong because I say so", while offering nothing substantial to back your claim up. Nothing wrong with my comprehension, hoss. Not so sure about yours though.
So when you take a stroll to your two (ems) three choices, you're not accepting what was spoon fed to you .
No arguement no refusal oh thats right I'm wounded battle weary delusional but thats not out of character Im just doing what I'm told by mass murdering vent boy because he's so truthworthy and not the leader of the enemy we've been trying to stop for the past three games now .. gotcha .
You're ignoring the fact that Shepard's mission through the entire game was to activate the Crucible at all costs. Activating the Crucible is the only way forward both for Shepard and for the player. Activating the Crucible defeats the reapers, it is completely up to the individual player whether or not they accept anything the Catalyst has told them.
If Gamers were playing Batman they understand that their playing levels within the story and their not Batman , Mass Effect was advertised to gamers as our character .
And Mass Effect is a really cool guy, right?
"So the illusive man was right"
About control being a possibility of the Crucible. Not accepting Catalyst logic there, accepting the capabilities of the weapon designed and built by organics. Also hey man what's up, I feel like it's been a little while since we've crossed paths.
Modifié par Geneaux486, 07 juin 2012 - 02:15 .
#433
Posté 07 juin 2012 - 02:13
httinks2006
-
- Members
- 190 messages
tMc Tallgeese wrote...
The Catalyst doesn't consider turning a race into a Reaper as killing it. The idea is that race is being spared destruction in the conflict of any non-ascension worthy species. You must remember that the Catalyst is not bound by some moral code, like you. It does not feel, it calculates. Taking the form of the boy was likely a choice on the part of the catalyst to choose a form that would be familiar to Shepard much in the same way that the alien in Contact explained. It is also important to note that many of these are setup that way because the writers needed a device to deliver the exposition in the closing moments. Everything the Catalyst says is based on the idea that it has seen the repetition of creation, rebellion and destruction so often that it has determined that the only solution was to do what it does now. Shepard reaching the Catalyst proves to it that the plan is no longer viable. As a result, the Catalyst determines that Shepard shall choose the outcome and see how it unfolds from there. The fact that you make any choice does not mean you trust it, but simply take the only course of action granted to you...limiting to be sure, but no level of trust is implied unless you take the Control option.
Horrible argument : A Murder when questioned . I didnt kill anyone I brought them peace , I spared them their eventual self destruction , I ascended them to a higher existence I can do this because I'm not bound by your moral code or laws ......
Theres no proof Vent boy knows that Organics will be destroyed it has never happened. It's trying to prevent something from happening which is based only on it's own assumptions that the created will totally wipe out it's creators . With all the trillions of lives it's killed no one in their right mind is going belive it and trust that any option it gives to you to be truthful or factual based on it's actions .
#434
Posté 07 juin 2012 - 02:52
LinksOcarina
-
- Members
- 6 539 messages
httinks2006 wrote...
LinksOcarina wrote...
httinks2006 wrote...
Geneaux486 wrote...
httinks2006 wrote...
Actually you're wrong Shepard is not debateable in acting out of character through three games up until the last 10 minutes it spins out of character of the Avatar we've all played throughout the series , whether you play as a Paragon or Renegade.
Shepard barely speaks at all before control is turned over to the player, doesn't act out of character, acts like a person who's on their last leg after recieving heavy injuries, who's down to their last options. Confused, wounded, weary, and the more time goes by the more of his allies die in the fight above. Makes sense that their questions would be brief, Shepard keeps his or her mouth shut so the player can think for themselves which choice they want to go with. From there the choice Shepard makes depends on the player. So no, Shepard does not act out of what little character is outside of the player's control through the three games.
No once again you're wrong , apparently you haven't been playing the same game , and I already knew you were going try to use the excuse that their heavily wounded, weary and the toll of war has caught up to them . Your arguments are very predictable to your defense of the nonsense that what was presented to the player in endgame.
Bioware throughout the series have given the players choices based on how we played our characters , and the responses have been pretty nail on the head until this horrid ending .There is no way our characters would have accepted what was spooned fed to use by vent boy . Both paragon and renegade Shepards would never have followed what was clearily moronic ,illogical reasoning and vent boys solutions to the Reapers
. This is based on three games of how this avatar responded to every situation thrown up agaisnt them and the outcomes of their decisons . That is called being out of character .
Except that he was never really your character to begin with. You can shape the story around Shepard, shape responses and actions, and use that to have a percpetion of the world and make decisions. But in the end, Shepard always did things that would agree or disagree with the player, because the storyline always trumped the role playing.
I hate to say it, but Shepard is a strange style of character because he is supposed to be a more "power fantasy" archetype based on customization, but follows a rather linear storypath to a linear conclusion. It is a Light RPG game with a Western RPG mentality, and these are hard to pull off because it is two contrasting styles of RPGs.
So you are wrong, but also sort of right, at the same time. Shepard may not do that in your mind because you wouldn't do that in the context of how Shepard normally acts, but in the context of the story he may do that based off the scenario. So in the end, like every game BioWare has made so far, the story trumps the player in the climax.
This is not a bad thing, mind you, like I said, BioWare had mae a career doing this, and we have seen a lot of RPGs follow in this wake; Witcher, Kingdoms of Amalur, and even classic games like Planescape Torment or . Shadowrun have done it too. But it is something people fail to recognize sometimes, which makes your argument fairly redundant.
If Gamers were playing Batman they understand that their playing levels within the story and their not Batman , Mass Effect was advertised to gamers as our character .
Then they false advertised in Mass Effect 1.
Although all the ads I saw were about choices, not character. So either my memory is fuzzy, or you just made that up. So, proof please?
But regardless, that is still wrong, because Shepard is a sort of hybrid character like that by design. It is Shepards story, we just shape the events in it. Kind of like how it was the Jedi Exiles story, the Wardens story, and the Bhaalspawn's story.
We can customize them all we want, but we still followed their story in the end. We just happened to change up the details as we went.
#435
Posté 07 juin 2012 - 04:50
httinks2006
-
- Members
- 190 messages
LinksOcarina wrote...
httinks2006 wrote...
LinksOcarina wrote...
httinks2006 wrote...
Geneaux486 wrote...
httinks2006 wrote...
Actually you're wrong Shepard is not debateable in acting out of character through three games up until the last 10 minutes it spins out of character of the Avatar we've all played throughout the series , whether you play as a Paragon or Renegade.
Shepard barely speaks at all before control is turned over to the player, doesn't act out of character, acts like a person who's on their last leg after recieving heavy injuries, who's down to their last options. Confused, wounded, weary, and the more time goes by the more of his allies die in the fight above. Makes sense that their questions would be brief, Shepard keeps his or her mouth shut so the player can think for themselves which choice they want to go with. From there the choice Shepard makes depends on the player. So no, Shepard does not act out of what little character is outside of the player's control through the three games.
No once again you're wrong , apparently you haven't been playing the same game , and I already knew you were going try to use the excuse that their heavily wounded, weary and the toll of war has caught up to them . Your arguments are very predictable to your defense of the nonsense that what was presented to the player in endgame.
Bioware throughout the series have given the players choices based on how we played our characters , and the responses have been pretty nail on the head until this horrid ending .There is no way our characters would have accepted what was spooned fed to use by vent boy . Both paragon and renegade Shepards would never have followed what was clearily moronic ,illogical reasoning and vent boys solutions to the Reapers
. This is based on three games of how this avatar responded to every situation thrown up agaisnt them and the outcomes of their decisons . That is called being out of character .
Except that he was never really your character to begin with. You can shape the story around Shepard, shape responses and actions, and use that to have a percpetion of the world and make decisions. But in the end, Shepard always did things that would agree or disagree with the player, because the storyline always trumped the role playing.
I hate to say it, but Shepard is a strange style of character because he is supposed to be a more "power fantasy" archetype based on customization, but follows a rather linear storypath to a linear conclusion. It is a Light RPG game with a Western RPG mentality, and these are hard to pull off because it is two contrasting styles of RPGs.
So you are wrong, but also sort of right, at the same time. Shepard may not do that in your mind because you wouldn't do that in the context of how Shepard normally acts, but in the context of the story he may do that based off the scenario. So in the end, like every game BioWare has made so far, the story trumps the player in the climax.
This is not a bad thing, mind you, like I said, BioWare had mae a career doing this, and we have seen a lot of RPGs follow in this wake; Witcher, Kingdoms of Amalur, and even classic games like Planescape Torment or . Shadowrun have done it too. But it is something people fail to recognize sometimes, which makes your argument fairly redundant.
If Gamers were playing Batman they understand that their playing levels within the story and their not Batman , Mass Effect was advertised to gamers as our character .
Then they false advertised in Mass Effect 1.
Although all the ads I saw were about choices, not character. So either my memory is fuzzy, or you just made that up. So, proof please?
But regardless, that is still wrong, because Shepard is a sort of hybrid character like that by design. It is Shepards story, we just shape the events in it. Kind of like how it was the Jedi Exiles story, the Wardens story, and the Bhaalspawn's story.
We can customize them all we want, but we still followed their story in the end. We just happened to change up the details as we went.
Whether or not you enjoyed the conclusion to Mass Effect 3 (personally I feel
it tarnished an otherwise masterful series) please take a look at the
pre-release quotes below from websites and interviews with the game's
developers, writers and producers.
Does all that talk of meaningful player choice, multiple significantly
different endings and closure for the characters and series not seem,
at the very least, strange?
I believe Bioware can be legitimately accused of, at best, fudging the
truth if not outright deceit given the inconsistency between notions
of choice, closure etc. expressed before the game was released and
the ending as it currently stands.
In my opinion Bioware produced a badly written, ill-conceived shambles
of an ending riddled with plot holes and logical inconsistencies but
even if you loved the final moments of this great game do you really
think what was stated in the interviews below has been proved true?
Maybe Walters, Gamble, Hudson et al will be proved right when a decent
ending is released via (presumably free) DLC that explains the
original ending was just some sort of hallucination/indoctrination.
I'm not holding my breath waiting for that though.
Official Mass Effect Website
http://masseffect.com/about/story/
“Experience the beginning, middle, and end of an emotional story unlike any
other, where the decisions you make completely shape your experience
and outcome.”
Interview with Mac Walters (Lead Writer)
http://popwatch.ew.c...-3-mac-walters/
“[The presence of the Rachni] has huge consequences in Mass
Effect 3. Even just in the final battle with the Reapers.”
Interview with Mac Walters (Lead Writer)
http://business.fina...-all-audiences/
“I’m always leery of saying there are 'optimal' endings, because I think
one of the things we do try to do is make different endings that are
optimal for different people “
Interview with Mike Gamble (Associate Producer)
http://www.computera...missing-in-me2/
“And, to be honest, you [the fans] are crafting your Mass Effect story as
much as we are anyway.”
Interview with Mike Gamble (Associate Producer)
http://www.360magazi...ferent-endings/
“There are many different endings. We wouldn’t do it any other way. How
could you go through all three campaigns playing as your Shepard and
then be forced into a bespoke ending that everyone gets? But I can’t
say any more than that…”
Interview with Mike Gamble (Associate Producer)
http://www.eurogamer...me-people-angry
“Every decision you've made will impact how things go. The player's also the
architect of what happens."
“You'll get answers to everything. That was one of the key things. Regardless
of how we did everything, we had to say, yes, we're going to provide
some answers to these people.”
“Because a lot of these plot threads are concluding and because it's being
brought to a finale, since you were a part of architecting how they
got to how they were, you will definitely sense how they close was
because of the decisions you made and because of the decisions you
didn't make”
Interview with Casey Hudson (Director)
http://www.gameinfor...s-effect-3.aspx
“For people who are invested in these characters and the back-story of the
universe and everything, all of these things come to a resolution in
Mass Effect 3. And they are resolved in a way that's very different
based on what you would do in those situations.”
Interview with Casey Hudson (Director)
http://venturebeat.c...fans-interview/
“Fans want to make sure that they see things resolved, they want to get
some closure, a great ending. I think they’re going to get that.”
“Mass Effect 3 is all about answering all the biggest questions in the
lore, learning about the mysteries and the Protheans and the Reapers,
being able to decide for yourself how all of these things come to an
end.”
Interviewer: “So are you guys the creators or the stewards of the franchise?”
Hudson: “Um… You know, at this point, I think we’re co-creators with
the fans. We use a lot of feedback.”
Interview with Casey Hudson (Director)
http://www.gameinfor...PostPageIndex=2
Interviewer: [Regarding the numerous possible endings of Mass Effect 2] “Is that
same type of complexity built into the ending of Mass Effect 3?”
Hudson: “Yeah, and I’d say much more so, because we have the ability to
build the endings out in a way that we don’t have to worry about
eventually tying them back together somewhere. This story arc is
coming to an end with this game. That means the endings can be a lot
more different. At this point we’re taking into account so many
decisions that you’ve made as a player and reflecting a lot of that
stuff. It’s not even in any way like the traditional game endings,
where you can say how many endings there are or whether you got
ending A, B, or C.....The endings have a lot more sophistication and
variety in them.”
“We have a rule in our franchise that there is no canon. You as a player
decide what your story is.”
EDIT: Couple more interesting quotes I found, enjoy......or not.
Mike Gamble (Associate Producer)
http://www.nowgamer....in_bioware.html
Mass Effect 3 will shake up the player's moral choices more than ever
before, even going so far as allowing the Reapers to win the battle
for Earth, according to BioWare's community representative Mike
Gamble.
In an inteview with NowGamer at Gamescom, we asked if BioWare was taking risks with Mass Effect 3's
plot, including a negative ending in which the Reapers win. Gamble simply said, "Yes". We asked him again to confirm what he had just said and he said, "Yes".
Mike Gamble (Associate Producer)
http://www.nowgamer....ry_details.html
"Of course you don’t have to play multiplayer, you can choose to play
all the side-quests in single-player and do all that stuff you’ll
still get all the same endings and same information, it’s just a
totally different way of playing"
Casey Hudson (Director)
http://gamescatalyst...active-stories/
“The whole idea of Mass Effect3 is resolving all of the biggest questions, about the Protheons and
the Reapers, and being in the driver's seat to end the galaxy and all
of these big plot lines, to decide what civilizations are going to
live or die: All of these things are answered in Mass Effect 3.”
Casey Hudson (Director)
http://www.computera...ly-good/?page=2
“There is a huge set of consequences that start stacking up as you approach the end-game. And
even in terms of the ending itself, it continues to break down to
some very large decisions. So it's not like a classic game ending
where everything is linear and you make a choice between a few things
- it really does layer in many, many different choices, up to the
final moments, where it's going to be different for everyone who
plays it.”
EDIT: Thanks to Skidrow-Garrett for pointing out another mystifying quote or two. It seems Bioware worked for years on the ending and are really pleased with it. I think it makes new DLC to address all the concerns less likely, unfortunately.
Ray Muzyka (Co-Founder of Bioware)
http://penny-arcade....ing-a-trilogy-a
“I just finished an end to end playthrough, for me the ending was the
most satisfying of any game I’ve ever played….the decisions you make in
this game are epic,”
“The team has been planning
for this for years, since the beginning of the Mass Effect franchise.
Largely the same team, most of the same leads have worked on this for
years and years. They’ve thought about [the ending] for years and years.
It’s not something they’ve had to solve in a week or a month even, but
over the course of five or ten years.”
#436
Posté 07 juin 2012 - 05:00
incinerator950
-
- Members
- 5 617 messages
Consider this the divorce Angry.
#437
Posté 07 juin 2012 - 05:08
LinksOcarina
-
- Members
- 6 539 messages
All of this evidence you just showed has nothing to do with what I was talking about, @httinks.
What you showed instead was the promises about the game, and a ton of hyperbole that we see from press releases and interviews regarding the type of ending were getting, choices made in-game, and so forth, which has nothing to do with Shepard's character because it was framed to be that type of ending.
In fact, the only one that you could make an argument on is the following quote,
“We have a rule in our franchise that there is no canon. You as a player
decide what your story is.”
This I would dispute, because other than the Dragon Age series, there is a canon that is followed in their games. You will always be the Bhallspawn, Revan will always be male and become a Jedi Knight again after being a Sith, and Commander Shepard will always kill Saren and the collectors, and not die during the Suicide Mission.
So yeah, there they did kind of stretch the truth to the point where I would call foul on it. But the fact remains; Shepard was never your character in the sense you believed it to be. You can shape events around Shepard, make your own canon for the three games, but in the end the story will still trump the roleplaying, because certains events need to happen in order to complete the story.
So you missed the point dude, because the rest of those quotes have nothing to do with the character of Shepard and how he is supposed to the be players avatar of themself, as you charged him breaking character in the games finale. So I ask again,show proof that Commander Shepard was supposed to be you, versus his/her own person that you manipulated through three games to tell a story.
What you showed instead was the promises about the game, and a ton of hyperbole that we see from press releases and interviews regarding the type of ending were getting, choices made in-game, and so forth, which has nothing to do with Shepard's character because it was framed to be that type of ending.
In fact, the only one that you could make an argument on is the following quote,
“We have a rule in our franchise that there is no canon. You as a player
decide what your story is.”
This I would dispute, because other than the Dragon Age series, there is a canon that is followed in their games. You will always be the Bhallspawn, Revan will always be male and become a Jedi Knight again after being a Sith, and Commander Shepard will always kill Saren and the collectors, and not die during the Suicide Mission.
So yeah, there they did kind of stretch the truth to the point where I would call foul on it. But the fact remains; Shepard was never your character in the sense you believed it to be. You can shape events around Shepard, make your own canon for the three games, but in the end the story will still trump the roleplaying, because certains events need to happen in order to complete the story.
So you missed the point dude, because the rest of those quotes have nothing to do with the character of Shepard and how he is supposed to the be players avatar of themself, as you charged him breaking character in the games finale. So I ask again,show proof that Commander Shepard was supposed to be you, versus his/her own person that you manipulated through three games to tell a story.
Modifié par LinksOcarina, 07 juin 2012 - 05:18 .
#438
Posté 07 juin 2012 - 05:31
The Night Mammoth
-
- Members
- 7 476 messages
LinksOcarina wrote...
So you missed the point dude, because the rest of those quotes have nothing to do with the character of Shepard and how he is supposed to the be players avatar of themself, as you charged him breaking character in the games finale. So I ask again,show proof that Commander Shepard was supposed to be you, versus his/her own person that you manipulated through three games to tell a story.
It's an interesting point to discuss.
Is Shepard really you? Are you making the decisions you would make in those situations, or are you just manipulating BioWare's character? Or are you roleplaying someone predetermined based on specific criteria?
I think it's a little of all those things.
Specifically, I'm crafting Shepard as a Paragon because that's how I feel I would react in those situations. There's always a track that people follow, they expect a paragon and a renegade choice. They expect a certain amount of consistency within the character you make.
Hence why the ending, and several choice moments, feel strange to some. Speaking from experience, I know my iteration of Shepard would not just go along with the Catalyst and blindly choose one of those options, few times in the story have I ever questioned the actions of my own character. Suspension of Disbelief is to blaim.
#439
Posté 07 juin 2012 - 06:07
LinksOcarina
-
- Members
- 6 539 messages
Adding to this, since you for some reason are trying to twist the argument into somthing else to formulate your own opinion, I might as well play ball with these interviews real quick. I know about them allready of course, and I even reported on some of them, but since none of these quotes have anything to do with what I am talking about, I figured I would post them separately here
[quote]httinks2006 wrote...
Official Mass Effect Website
http://masseffect.com/about/story/
“Experience the beginning, middle, and end of an emotional story unlike any
other, where the decisions you make completely shape your experience
and outcome.” [/quote]
This is hyperbole but also pretty much true. The story was emotional, and decisions you made did impact the experience and outcome, Tuchanka, Rannoch, Thessia, Earth, and the final choice had emotions and were impactful. HOW they were impactful is another question, one that is not addressed here. But positive or negative the experience shaped the outcome.
[quote]Interview with Mac Walters (Lead Writer)
http://popwatch.ew.c...-3-mac-walters/
“[The presence of the Rachni] has huge consequences in Mass
Effect 3. Even just in the final battle with the Reapers.”[/quote]
Again more hyperbole, and I guess they couldn't figure out a way for it to work. But yeah, you can argue the Rachni didn't impact the final battle with the exception of adding war assets, which is kind of the point for the game anyway.
[quote]Interview with Mac Walters (Lead Writer)
http://business.fina...-all-audiences/
“I’m always leery of saying there are 'optimal' endings, because I think
one of the things we do try to do is make different endings that are
optimal for different people “[/quote]
Has little to do with the endings, since he is just giving his opinion on what BioWare tries to do, but never really did to begin with. So it may be true that they try to make the endings unique, but they never can because they are married to the story.
[quote]Interview with Mike Gamble (Associate Producer)
http://www.computera...missing-in-me2/
“And, to be honest, you [the fans] are crafting your Mass Effect story as
much as we are anyway.”[/quote]
True again, you did craft the story as your own personal canon in some respects. But the main storyline is still in th ehands of BioWare, which they should have mentioned.
[quote]Interview with Mike Gamble (Associate Producer)
http://www.360magazi...ferent-endings/
“There are many different endings. We wouldn’t do it any other way. How
could you go through all three campaigns playing as your Shepard and
then be forced into a bespoke ending that everyone gets? But I can’t
say any more than that…”[/quote]
You had 1 variations on the ending, with three cut-scenes serving as the meat of the ending with variants. For a quick comparison, you had only two variants on the ending to Mass Effect 1, and 5 variants for Mass Effect 2 (all survive, some/all die, you die, base destroyed, base saved) The 12 variants were as follows for the ending of 3.
1. Catalyst makes the choice for you (Control/Destroy)
2. You choose control
3. You choose Destroy and die
4. You choose Destroy and live
5. You choose Synthesis
6. Stargazer ending
7. Earth destroyed
8. Earth devestated
9. Earth saved
10. Normandy and Squadmates killed
11. Normandy and Squadmates survive
12. Squadmates synthesized
Each of them are based on the EMS score, so some endings get locked out depending on that score for your game. So choices made in game, and prior to the game, effect the outcome of the ending after you make the choice, example: Low EMS equals choosing an ending and Earth is destroyed, squad is killed, and so forth. The lack of variety mentioned is the cut-scene aspects, which were also in 1 and 2 and is honestly a weak argument.
The content of the cutscenes, and implications and lack of closure, however, is not. That is the only thing missing from above, what happens if they survive and so forth, as an example
[quote]Interview with Mike Gamble (Associate Producer)
http://www.eurogamer...me-people-angry
“Every decision you've made will impact how things go. The player's also the
architect of what happens."[/quote]
Is a true statement, as shown above due to War Assets and EMS levels.
[quote]“You'll get answers to everything. That was one of the key things. Regardless
of how we did everything, we had to say, yes, we're going to provide
some answers to these people.”
“Because a lot of these plot threads are concluding and because it's being
brought to a finale, since you were a part of architecting how they
got to how they were, you will definitely sense how they close was
because of the decisions you made and because of the decisions you
didn't make”[/quote]
Ok not entirely true. We are missing answers for a lot of things, although they did give closure to many characters and lingering plot threads throughout the game. The lack of closure I keep mentioning is the aftermath of the Reapers on Earth, and how the galaxy lives on if it does at all, which is important to know.
[quote]Interview with Casey Hudson (Director)
http://www.gameinfor...s-effect-3.aspx
“For people who are invested in these characters and the back-story of the
universe and everything, all of these things come to a resolution in
Mass Effect 3. And they are resolved in a way that's very different
based on what you would do in those situations.”[/quote]
Not entirely true. We see it in the characters yes, but not in the overall story.
[quote]Interview with Casey Hudson (Director)
http://venturebeat.c...fans-interview/
“Fans want to make sure that they see things resolved, they want to get
some closure, a great ending. I think they’re going to get that.”
“Mass Effect 3 is all about answering all the biggest questions in the
lore, learning about the mysteries and the Protheans and the Reapers,
being able to decide for yourself how all of these things come to an
end.”
Interviewer: “So are you guys the creators or the stewards of the franchise?”
Hudson: “Um… You know, at this point, I think we’re co-creators with
the fans. We use a lot of feedback.”[/quote]
A bit hyperbolic, but they are the creators of the franchise for sure, with fans giving their input as fan-style edits basically, which is what each Mass Effect game is.
As for the ending, they did answer those questions; that the Protheans kind of uplifted the Asari and other races, that they were close in killing the reapers but couldn't finish the job, and that the Reapers purpose is to eliminate Chaos becuase of the organic vs synthetic cycle that is created. So that is true, even if you don't like the explaination.
[quote]Interview with Casey Hudson (Director)
http://www.gameinfor...PostPageIndex=2
Interviewer: [Regarding the numerous possible endings of Mass Effect 2] “Is that
same type of complexity built into the ending of Mass Effect 3?”
Hudson: “Yeah, and I’d say much more so, because we have the ability to
build the endings out in a way that we don’t have to worry about
eventually tying them back together somewhere. This story arc is
coming to an end with this game. That means the endings can be a lot
more different. At this point we’re taking into account so many
decisions that you’ve made as a player and reflecting a lot of that
stuff. It’s not even in any way like the traditional game endings,
where you can say how many endings there are or whether you got
ending A, B, or C.....The endings have a lot more sophistication and
variety in them.”
“We have a rule in our franchise that there is no canon. You as a player
decide what your story is.”[/quote]
The bottom part of this I referred to already as a credible complaint. As for the endings, they are not A, B, C as stated above with the 12 different variants. As for the endings being a lot more different, that is impossible because it was tied to a story that is linear since game one, even if the endings were not the planned ending originally. So once again, hyperbolic and not entirely true to what happened, but it doesn't mean an outright lie either.
[quote]Mike Gamble (Associate Producer)
http://www.nowgamer....in_bioware.html
Mass Effect 3 will shake up the player's moral choices more than ever
before, even going so far as allowing the Reapers to win the battle
for Earth, according to BioWare's community representative Mike
Gamble.
In an inteview with NowGamer at Gamescom, we asked if BioWare was taking risks with Mass Effect 3's
plot, including a negative ending in which the Reapers win. Gamble simply said, "Yes". We asked him again to confirm what he had just said and he said, "Yes".[/quote]
Bottom part is true, as I pointed out above where earth is destroyed and everyone pretty much dies. Top part is also true, as it did shake up moral choices during the finale, and prior to it during the games priority missions. Once again, it is moreso of an issue people disagreeing with the ending that makes them believe they didn't make the choice a morally complex one, or a terrible choice for that matter.
[quote]Mike Gamble (Associate Producer)
http://www.nowgamer....ry_details.html
"Of course you don’t have to play multiplayer, you can choose to play
all the side-quests in single-player and do all that stuff you’ll
still get all the same endings and same information, it’s just a
totally different way of playing"[/quote]
A false t for the most part, but because of the conflicting reports on the EMS level being halved by the Galactic Readiness, it could be truth as well. I know I got the choice of Synthesis by playing multiplayer only four-five times to try it out before the final battle began, and I had an EMS score of around 5700 after it was halved. Did it help, yes, but it can be seen as a lie.
[quote]Casey Hudson (Director)
http://gamescatalyst...active-stories/
“The whole idea of Mass Effect3 is resolving all of the biggest questions, about the Protheons and
the Reapers, and being in the driver's seat to end the galaxy and all
of these big plot lines, to decide what civilizations are going to
live or die: All of these things are answered in Mass Effect 3.”[/quote]
Not sure why this is here, since this is pretty much true considering how your choices during the game impact a lot of who lives, dies, and is saved/killed during the war with the reapers.
[quote]Casey Hudson (Director)
http://www.computera...ly-good/?page=2
“There is a huge set of consequences that start stacking up as you approach the end-game. And
even in terms of the ending itself, it continues to break down to
some very large decisions. So it's not like a classic game ending
where everything is linear and you make a choice between a few things
- it really does layer in many, many different choices, up to the
final moments, where it's going to be different for everyone who
plays it.”[/quote]
Also true, the consequences stack up, and the last decision is still a big one since you do play god for the most part. They are, however, wrong about the game not being linear, because it was since game 1. But they are right that previous choices do layer into the final decision, saving the geth or promoting EDI only to kill them in Destroy, believing what the Illusive man said for Control, after he failed at it, or taking the Catalysts dare for synthesis and hoping it is not like the twisted, physical deformities of Saren or the Overlord project.
So I am chalking this mostly up to hyperbole in some of the statemnts, and a falsehood in one part of it, being unlike a classic game ending with a linear conclusion, which it did have, like all BioWare games.
[quote]Ray Muzyka (Co-Founder of Bioware)
http://penny-arcade....ing-a-trilogy-a
“I just finished an end to end playthrough, for me the ending was the
most satisfying of any game I’ve ever played….the decisions you make in
this game are epic,”
“The team has been planning
for this for years, since the beginning of the Mass Effect franchise.
Largely the same team, most of the same leads have worked on this for
years and years. They’ve thought about [the ending] for years and years.
It’s not something they’ve had to solve in a week or a month even, but
over the course of five or ten years.”
[/quote]
Of course he would say that,hes the head of the company.
As for part 2, not sure how this fits in, other than they likely thought about the ending after the Drew K. was put on TOR, so id say it was over 3 years of thinking on how to end it at least, with the rest of that time thinking about alternate endings. But that is just a guess on my part, we will never really know when they first had the idea of the ending we received, we can only speculate and base it off of heresay.
As I stated above, I am not sure how these quotes have anything to do with Shepard being out of character. As far as the quotes themselves, some of them are hyperbolic, some of them are cherry-picked to be used against the game when they really have nothing to do with it or are true essentially, and some of them were not true.
But honestly, anyone using quotes as context for how the game should have been, especially many that are supposed to be hyperbole to sell a game, is kind of hurting their case more than helping it.
[quote]httinks2006 wrote...
Official Mass Effect Website
http://masseffect.com/about/story/
“Experience the beginning, middle, and end of an emotional story unlike any
other, where the decisions you make completely shape your experience
and outcome.” [/quote]
This is hyperbole but also pretty much true. The story was emotional, and decisions you made did impact the experience and outcome, Tuchanka, Rannoch, Thessia, Earth, and the final choice had emotions and were impactful. HOW they were impactful is another question, one that is not addressed here. But positive or negative the experience shaped the outcome.
[quote]Interview with Mac Walters (Lead Writer)
http://popwatch.ew.c...-3-mac-walters/
“[The presence of the Rachni] has huge consequences in Mass
Effect 3. Even just in the final battle with the Reapers.”[/quote]
Again more hyperbole, and I guess they couldn't figure out a way for it to work. But yeah, you can argue the Rachni didn't impact the final battle with the exception of adding war assets, which is kind of the point for the game anyway.
[quote]Interview with Mac Walters (Lead Writer)
http://business.fina...-all-audiences/
“I’m always leery of saying there are 'optimal' endings, because I think
one of the things we do try to do is make different endings that are
optimal for different people “[/quote]
Has little to do with the endings, since he is just giving his opinion on what BioWare tries to do, but never really did to begin with. So it may be true that they try to make the endings unique, but they never can because they are married to the story.
[quote]Interview with Mike Gamble (Associate Producer)
http://www.computera...missing-in-me2/
“And, to be honest, you [the fans] are crafting your Mass Effect story as
much as we are anyway.”[/quote]
True again, you did craft the story as your own personal canon in some respects. But the main storyline is still in th ehands of BioWare, which they should have mentioned.
[quote]Interview with Mike Gamble (Associate Producer)
http://www.360magazi...ferent-endings/
“There are many different endings. We wouldn’t do it any other way. How
could you go through all three campaigns playing as your Shepard and
then be forced into a bespoke ending that everyone gets? But I can’t
say any more than that…”[/quote]
You had 1 variations on the ending, with three cut-scenes serving as the meat of the ending with variants. For a quick comparison, you had only two variants on the ending to Mass Effect 1, and 5 variants for Mass Effect 2 (all survive, some/all die, you die, base destroyed, base saved) The 12 variants were as follows for the ending of 3.
1. Catalyst makes the choice for you (Control/Destroy)
2. You choose control
3. You choose Destroy and die
4. You choose Destroy and live
5. You choose Synthesis
6. Stargazer ending
7. Earth destroyed
8. Earth devestated
9. Earth saved
10. Normandy and Squadmates killed
11. Normandy and Squadmates survive
12. Squadmates synthesized
Each of them are based on the EMS score, so some endings get locked out depending on that score for your game. So choices made in game, and prior to the game, effect the outcome of the ending after you make the choice, example: Low EMS equals choosing an ending and Earth is destroyed, squad is killed, and so forth. The lack of variety mentioned is the cut-scene aspects, which were also in 1 and 2 and is honestly a weak argument.
The content of the cutscenes, and implications and lack of closure, however, is not. That is the only thing missing from above, what happens if they survive and so forth, as an example
[quote]Interview with Mike Gamble (Associate Producer)
http://www.eurogamer...me-people-angry
“Every decision you've made will impact how things go. The player's also the
architect of what happens."[/quote]
Is a true statement, as shown above due to War Assets and EMS levels.
[quote]“You'll get answers to everything. That was one of the key things. Regardless
of how we did everything, we had to say, yes, we're going to provide
some answers to these people.”
“Because a lot of these plot threads are concluding and because it's being
brought to a finale, since you were a part of architecting how they
got to how they were, you will definitely sense how they close was
because of the decisions you made and because of the decisions you
didn't make”[/quote]
Ok not entirely true. We are missing answers for a lot of things, although they did give closure to many characters and lingering plot threads throughout the game. The lack of closure I keep mentioning is the aftermath of the Reapers on Earth, and how the galaxy lives on if it does at all, which is important to know.
[quote]Interview with Casey Hudson (Director)
http://www.gameinfor...s-effect-3.aspx
“For people who are invested in these characters and the back-story of the
universe and everything, all of these things come to a resolution in
Mass Effect 3. And they are resolved in a way that's very different
based on what you would do in those situations.”[/quote]
Not entirely true. We see it in the characters yes, but not in the overall story.
[quote]Interview with Casey Hudson (Director)
http://venturebeat.c...fans-interview/
“Fans want to make sure that they see things resolved, they want to get
some closure, a great ending. I think they’re going to get that.”
“Mass Effect 3 is all about answering all the biggest questions in the
lore, learning about the mysteries and the Protheans and the Reapers,
being able to decide for yourself how all of these things come to an
end.”
Interviewer: “So are you guys the creators or the stewards of the franchise?”
Hudson: “Um… You know, at this point, I think we’re co-creators with
the fans. We use a lot of feedback.”[/quote]
A bit hyperbolic, but they are the creators of the franchise for sure, with fans giving their input as fan-style edits basically, which is what each Mass Effect game is.
As for the ending, they did answer those questions; that the Protheans kind of uplifted the Asari and other races, that they were close in killing the reapers but couldn't finish the job, and that the Reapers purpose is to eliminate Chaos becuase of the organic vs synthetic cycle that is created. So that is true, even if you don't like the explaination.
[quote]Interview with Casey Hudson (Director)
http://www.gameinfor...PostPageIndex=2
Interviewer: [Regarding the numerous possible endings of Mass Effect 2] “Is that
same type of complexity built into the ending of Mass Effect 3?”
Hudson: “Yeah, and I’d say much more so, because we have the ability to
build the endings out in a way that we don’t have to worry about
eventually tying them back together somewhere. This story arc is
coming to an end with this game. That means the endings can be a lot
more different. At this point we’re taking into account so many
decisions that you’ve made as a player and reflecting a lot of that
stuff. It’s not even in any way like the traditional game endings,
where you can say how many endings there are or whether you got
ending A, B, or C.....The endings have a lot more sophistication and
variety in them.”
“We have a rule in our franchise that there is no canon. You as a player
decide what your story is.”[/quote]
The bottom part of this I referred to already as a credible complaint. As for the endings, they are not A, B, C as stated above with the 12 different variants. As for the endings being a lot more different, that is impossible because it was tied to a story that is linear since game one, even if the endings were not the planned ending originally. So once again, hyperbolic and not entirely true to what happened, but it doesn't mean an outright lie either.
[quote]Mike Gamble (Associate Producer)
http://www.nowgamer....in_bioware.html
Mass Effect 3 will shake up the player's moral choices more than ever
before, even going so far as allowing the Reapers to win the battle
for Earth, according to BioWare's community representative Mike
Gamble.
In an inteview with NowGamer at Gamescom, we asked if BioWare was taking risks with Mass Effect 3's
plot, including a negative ending in which the Reapers win. Gamble simply said, "Yes". We asked him again to confirm what he had just said and he said, "Yes".[/quote]
Bottom part is true, as I pointed out above where earth is destroyed and everyone pretty much dies. Top part is also true, as it did shake up moral choices during the finale, and prior to it during the games priority missions. Once again, it is moreso of an issue people disagreeing with the ending that makes them believe they didn't make the choice a morally complex one, or a terrible choice for that matter.
[quote]Mike Gamble (Associate Producer)
http://www.nowgamer....ry_details.html
"Of course you don’t have to play multiplayer, you can choose to play
all the side-quests in single-player and do all that stuff you’ll
still get all the same endings and same information, it’s just a
totally different way of playing"[/quote]
A false t for the most part, but because of the conflicting reports on the EMS level being halved by the Galactic Readiness, it could be truth as well. I know I got the choice of Synthesis by playing multiplayer only four-five times to try it out before the final battle began, and I had an EMS score of around 5700 after it was halved. Did it help, yes, but it can be seen as a lie.
[quote]Casey Hudson (Director)
http://gamescatalyst...active-stories/
“The whole idea of Mass Effect3 is resolving all of the biggest questions, about the Protheons and
the Reapers, and being in the driver's seat to end the galaxy and all
of these big plot lines, to decide what civilizations are going to
live or die: All of these things are answered in Mass Effect 3.”[/quote]
Not sure why this is here, since this is pretty much true considering how your choices during the game impact a lot of who lives, dies, and is saved/killed during the war with the reapers.
[quote]Casey Hudson (Director)
http://www.computera...ly-good/?page=2
“There is a huge set of consequences that start stacking up as you approach the end-game. And
even in terms of the ending itself, it continues to break down to
some very large decisions. So it's not like a classic game ending
where everything is linear and you make a choice between a few things
- it really does layer in many, many different choices, up to the
final moments, where it's going to be different for everyone who
plays it.”[/quote]
Also true, the consequences stack up, and the last decision is still a big one since you do play god for the most part. They are, however, wrong about the game not being linear, because it was since game 1. But they are right that previous choices do layer into the final decision, saving the geth or promoting EDI only to kill them in Destroy, believing what the Illusive man said for Control, after he failed at it, or taking the Catalysts dare for synthesis and hoping it is not like the twisted, physical deformities of Saren or the Overlord project.
So I am chalking this mostly up to hyperbole in some of the statemnts, and a falsehood in one part of it, being unlike a classic game ending with a linear conclusion, which it did have, like all BioWare games.
[quote]Ray Muzyka (Co-Founder of Bioware)
http://penny-arcade....ing-a-trilogy-a
“I just finished an end to end playthrough, for me the ending was the
most satisfying of any game I’ve ever played….the decisions you make in
this game are epic,”
“The team has been planning
for this for years, since the beginning of the Mass Effect franchise.
Largely the same team, most of the same leads have worked on this for
years and years. They’ve thought about [the ending] for years and years.
It’s not something they’ve had to solve in a week or a month even, but
over the course of five or ten years.”
[/quote]
Of course he would say that,hes the head of the company.
As for part 2, not sure how this fits in, other than they likely thought about the ending after the Drew K. was put on TOR, so id say it was over 3 years of thinking on how to end it at least, with the rest of that time thinking about alternate endings. But that is just a guess on my part, we will never really know when they first had the idea of the ending we received, we can only speculate and base it off of heresay.
As I stated above, I am not sure how these quotes have anything to do with Shepard being out of character. As far as the quotes themselves, some of them are hyperbolic, some of them are cherry-picked to be used against the game when they really have nothing to do with it or are true essentially, and some of them were not true.
But honestly, anyone using quotes as context for how the game should have been, especially many that are supposed to be hyperbole to sell a game, is kind of hurting their case more than helping it.
#440
Posté 07 juin 2012 - 06:22
LinksOcarina
-
- Members
- 6 539 messages
The Night Mammoth wrote...
LinksOcarina wrote...
So you missed the point dude, because the rest of those quotes have nothing to do with the character of Shepard and how he is supposed to the be players avatar of themself, as you charged him breaking character in the games finale. So I ask again,show proof that Commander Shepard was supposed to be you, versus his/her own person that you manipulated through three games to tell a story.
It's an interesting point to discuss.
Is Shepard really you? Are you making the decisions you would make in those situations, or are you just manipulating BioWare's character? Or are you roleplaying someone predetermined based on specific criteria?
I think it's a little of all those things.
Specifically, I'm crafting Shepard as a Paragon because that's how I feel I would react in those situations. There's always a track that people follow, they expect a paragon and a renegade choice. They expect a certain amount of consistency within the character you make.
Hence why the ending, and several choice moments, feel strange to some. Speaking from experience, I know my iteration of Shepard would not just go along with the Catalyst and blindly choose one of those options, few times in the story have I ever questioned the actions of my own character. Suspension of Disbelief is to blaim.
I do agree with this. It is a hybrid character of sorts, being a BioWare character that you happen to roleplay.
And it is why the paragon/renegade system was always fairly broken because it only affected you, not those around you. You can say what you want and be as nice or nasty to rack up points for it, or to influence decisions, but it never really affected the storyline with the exception of several decisions that were given a "para/renegade" slant where it is really subjective, like say rewriting or destroying the geth, where both are fairly renegade, or saving or destroying maelons data, where both are really paragon.
Dragon Age II, despite being a game many consider mediocre, had the right idea by making the friendship/rivalry system be about the reactions to those around you that can change over time, which offered flexability in being nice, nasty, threatening, jovial, or downright insane as you role play. It allowed you to formulate opinions and change them, instead of being locked in a rigid system that gives paragon for good acts, and renegade for harsh acts.
So really, the system of choice in-game does not reflect the character of Shepard in the context of the storyline told, and that feels like to me the major issue at hand with the ending of the game. If it was more like the friendship/rivalry system in Dragon Age II, then the choices maybe would mean more, and the linearity of the game would not be so noticable throughout. We would lose that suspension of disbelief id wager.
#441
Posté 08 juin 2012 - 03:45
httinks2006
-
- Members
- 190 messages
Actually I'm not turning the argument around in the least bit , you asked for proof it's in these recent quotes and in the marketing through the years . yes I can do all the work and highlight research the internet and get every detail for you and highlight it . though since you want answers look it up for yourself and those other quotes really I never expected you to respond to them . they were just grouped with the proof you asked for and felt you needed to read them all to get a sense of how Bioware makes promises to the player base, and along with vent boy seems to lie when it suits their purpose .
Modifié par httinks2006, 08 juin 2012 - 03:47 .
#442
Posté 08 juin 2012 - 03:56
SaltBot
-
- Members
- 237 messages
I don't see a lot of people calling into question the words of Sovereign in ME1, or Harbinger in Arrival. Why wouldn't a Reaper lie? Or Saren for that matter? TIM? Anderson? The Council? Is every conversation Shep ever had with any sort of NPC now to be called into question because "they can't be trusted"?
I obviously cannot speak for everyone, but I take the words of The Catalyst at face value if only because this is a video game and the writers only really have two choices for explaining the plot to us, the players: dialogue from a possibly questionable source, or a voice-over narrative a-la Blade Runner's theatrical release. Pick your poison.
I obviously cannot speak for everyone, but I take the words of The Catalyst at face value if only because this is a video game and the writers only really have two choices for explaining the plot to us, the players: dialogue from a possibly questionable source, or a voice-over narrative a-la Blade Runner's theatrical release. Pick your poison.
#443
Posté 08 juin 2012 - 04:05
Geneaux486
-
- Members
- 2 248 messages
httinks2006 wrote...
Actually I'm not turning the argument around in the least bit , you asked for proof it's in these recent quotes and in the marketing through the years . yes I can do all the work and highlight research the internet and get every detail for you and highlight it . though since you want answers look it up for yourself and those other quotes really I never expected you to respond to them . they were just grouped with the proof you asked for and felt you needed to read them all to get a sense of how Bioware makes promises to the player base, and along with vent boy seems to lie when it suits their purpose .
You boast that you *could* go to the trouble of doing the work and highlighting and research etc, yet you don't. LinksOcarina, on the other hand, actually went to the trouble of responding to each and every point you made, and all you can say in response is "no you're wrong because I say so" (which seems to be your response of choice in this thread, alongside "You're wrong because I predicted you'd say that"). Add to that the fact that you're basically telling him to look it up himself, effectively asking him to put more work into your response than you are willing to put yourself.
Your original argument that Shepard acted out of character is still completely and totally false, as I and others have explained. You've said nothing substantial to refute that, merely cited irrelevant information and told us we're wrong based on what is essentially nothing.
I obviously cannot speak for everyone, but I take the words of The Catalyst at face value if only because this is a video game and the writers only really have two choices for explaining the plot to us, the players: dialogue from a possibly questionable source, or a voice-over narrative a-la Blade Runner's theatrical release. Pick your poison.
That and the fact that whether or not the Catalyst is honest with you is irrelevant. The Crucible has to be used, game gives us three ways to do that, and all three ways end the Reaper threat. The Catalyst provides exposition, but changes nothing fundamental about Shepard's goal unless the player controlling Shepard lets him.
Modifié par Geneaux486, 08 juin 2012 - 04:08 .
#445
Posté 08 juin 2012 - 11:22
lDonutsl
-
- Members
- 22 messages
Doesn't the catalyst also say the "the created will always rebel against the creator" or something along those lines? Reapers are created by Reapers, so shouldn't they be in the midst of a reaper civil war right now?
#446
Posté 08 juin 2012 - 02:17
Geneaux486
-
- Members
- 2 248 messages
anorling wrote...
Except that's not how the conversation goes. The Catalyst simply tells you what functions the Crucible is capable of, lays all the cards on the table, even the one that kills the Reapers, and explains to you the consequences of each choice. If it were being dishonest, it wouldn't mention the capability to destroy (or control, for that matter), nor would it tell you about the destruction of the Mass Relays were you to choose Synthesis. In fact, if the Catalyst didn't genuinelly believe that this weapon of organic design offered a better solution than his own, he wouldn't have helped Shepard activate the thing at all. Shepard, the in-game character, doesn't believe anything on his or her own, other than that the Crucible must be activated, which is told to that character through the game by most every character. Believing anything about what the Catalyst says regarding the motives and necessity of the Reapers is completely up to the player. That is just one reason why the "Shepard acted out of character" argument fails.
tl;dr that image is a bull**** summation.
Modifié par Geneaux486, 08 juin 2012 - 02:22 .
#447
Posté 08 juin 2012 - 02:53
httinks2006
-
- Members
- 190 messages
[quote]Geneaux486 wrote...
[quote]anorling wrote...
[/quote]
Except that's not how the conversation goes. The Catalyst simply tells you what functions the Crucible is capable of, lays all the cards on the table, even the one that kills the Reapers, and explains to you the consequences of each choice. If it were being dishonest, it wouldn't mention the capability to destroy (or control, for that matter), nor would it tell you about the destruction of the Mass Relays were you to choose Synthesis. In fact, if the Catalyst didn't genuinelly believe that this weapon of organic design offered a better solution than his own, he wouldn't have helped Shepard activate the thing at all. Shepard, the in-game character, doesn't believe anything on his or her own, other than that the Crucible must be activated, which is told to that character through the game by most every character. Believing anything about what the Catalyst says regarding the motives and necessity of the Reapers is completely up to the player. That is just one reason why the "Shepard acted out of character" argument fails.
no wrong because there is not an option to say no, argue or try and defeat the catalyst so fail on your part
tl;dr that image is a bull**** summation.[/quote]
[quote]
It still comes back to believing vent boy is telling the truth on the functions of the Crucible , leader of reaper who Happens to also be the catalyst of the device that stops them.. so let me see if vent boy is the energy source or the key that powers the space magic to either Control , Synthesis and even Destroy which is it going try to push the character towards .... (( actually villians tend to boast and give away what can defeat them weak argument once again))
So let me see if I understand what you're asking me .
You want me to give you proof that what I'm telling you is based on facts within the
game not my own personal knowledge of multiple playthroughs , observations, and
experiences throughout the three Mass Effect Games .
You'd like me to explain to you countless examples throughout my gaming of how vent
boy is lying and the relevence of it to the mass effect universe and our characters .
Then on top of that give you additional proof that Bioware presented this game to us
with the expectation of how the character/Shepard is our Avatar throughout the past
fives years ,and then list all of them for you so you can understand my reasoning of
why I've stated this to you .
I Am The CAtalyst , you only need to know that I'm telling you is the truth because I
am a gamer and my purpose is to beat the game . I'm going give you three choices of
how you can take this
you can stand in disbelief and go hide out of embarrassment that you got caught with
your own circular logic
you can admit defeat and say good show
you can stomp your feet and fall to the floor wailing ,kicking,screaming and become
the ultimate jerk and say you're just full of s&^t
I personally don't believe you guys are stupid for what you believe in , though it
does appear you're ignorant of the game you've been playing for the past five years
The unique thing about Mass effect was this was your character it wasn't Squall or
Cloud from Final Fantasy where the best you could do was name them and follow the
linear path that square set in front of you.Mass Effect gave us something special and
different which I Applaud them for and if people happened to have missed out on this
part of the game I truly feel for them.
It's sad how you can demand from the player communtity proof when they argue agaisnt
your statements ,but the catalyst a video game villian you blindy follow despite the
facts he's a proven murdering genocide evil entity leader of the reapers that have
killed trillions . But when he tells you it's okay to listen to him and make a choice
out of the two(ems) three that he gives you , that's ok and you follow like sheep to
the slaughter ...........
Yes yes it is a video game , but as many have stated quite often it still needs to
follow its own rules
Maybe sometime in the near future when I have more time on my hands I'll play all
three games again document all the games,every mission every interaction to show how
Shepard was a consistant Avatar up until the last 5-10 mins of ME3
Then research the whole internet for you guys finding all the promises ,statements and
marketing that told us that Mass Effect was something you had to play
Where when you entered the Mass Effect universe you were Shepard you would chooose
what you looked like ,how you acted towards the universe and their reaction to what
you did in words and actions. Every choice you made would carry consequences .
I can hear people saying now well you just said Shepard , Do you realize a character
is named so they can do voice acting for them .
I know for a fact that a smart phone can sound out names you type for contacts but
it's not the same just chew on that before you bring that argument up.
[quote]anorling wrote...
[/quote]Except that's not how the conversation goes. The Catalyst simply tells you what functions the Crucible is capable of, lays all the cards on the table, even the one that kills the Reapers, and explains to you the consequences of each choice. If it were being dishonest, it wouldn't mention the capability to destroy (or control, for that matter), nor would it tell you about the destruction of the Mass Relays were you to choose Synthesis. In fact, if the Catalyst didn't genuinelly believe that this weapon of organic design offered a better solution than his own, he wouldn't have helped Shepard activate the thing at all. Shepard, the in-game character, doesn't believe anything on his or her own, other than that the Crucible must be activated, which is told to that character through the game by most every character. Believing anything about what the Catalyst says regarding the motives and necessity of the Reapers is completely up to the player. That is just one reason why the "Shepard acted out of character" argument fails.
no wrong because there is not an option to say no, argue or try and defeat the catalyst so fail on your part
tl;dr that image is a bull**** summation.[/quote]
[quote]
It still comes back to believing vent boy is telling the truth on the functions of the Crucible , leader of reaper who Happens to also be the catalyst of the device that stops them.. so let me see if vent boy is the energy source or the key that powers the space magic to either Control , Synthesis and even Destroy which is it going try to push the character towards .... (( actually villians tend to boast and give away what can defeat them weak argument once again))
So let me see if I understand what you're asking me .
You want me to give you proof that what I'm telling you is based on facts within the
game not my own personal knowledge of multiple playthroughs , observations, and
experiences throughout the three Mass Effect Games .
You'd like me to explain to you countless examples throughout my gaming of how vent
boy is lying and the relevence of it to the mass effect universe and our characters .
Then on top of that give you additional proof that Bioware presented this game to us
with the expectation of how the character/Shepard is our Avatar throughout the past
fives years ,and then list all of them for you so you can understand my reasoning of
why I've stated this to you .
I Am The CAtalyst , you only need to know that I'm telling you is the truth because I
am a gamer and my purpose is to beat the game . I'm going give you three choices of
how you can take this
you can stand in disbelief and go hide out of embarrassment that you got caught with
your own circular logic
you can admit defeat and say good show
you can stomp your feet and fall to the floor wailing ,kicking,screaming and become
the ultimate jerk and say you're just full of s&^t
I personally don't believe you guys are stupid for what you believe in , though it
does appear you're ignorant of the game you've been playing for the past five years
The unique thing about Mass effect was this was your character it wasn't Squall or
Cloud from Final Fantasy where the best you could do was name them and follow the
linear path that square set in front of you.Mass Effect gave us something special and
different which I Applaud them for and if people happened to have missed out on this
part of the game I truly feel for them.
It's sad how you can demand from the player communtity proof when they argue agaisnt
your statements ,but the catalyst a video game villian you blindy follow despite the
facts he's a proven murdering genocide evil entity leader of the reapers that have
killed trillions . But when he tells you it's okay to listen to him and make a choice
out of the two(ems) three that he gives you , that's ok and you follow like sheep to
the slaughter ...........
Yes yes it is a video game , but as many have stated quite often it still needs to
follow its own rules
Maybe sometime in the near future when I have more time on my hands I'll play all
three games again document all the games,every mission every interaction to show how
Shepard was a consistant Avatar up until the last 5-10 mins of ME3
Then research the whole internet for you guys finding all the promises ,statements and
marketing that told us that Mass Effect was something you had to play
Where when you entered the Mass Effect universe you were Shepard you would chooose
what you looked like ,how you acted towards the universe and their reaction to what
you did in words and actions. Every choice you made would carry consequences .
I can hear people saying now well you just said Shepard , Do you realize a character
is named so they can do voice acting for them .
I know for a fact that a smart phone can sound out names you type for contacts but
it's not the same just chew on that before you bring that argument up.
#448
Posté 08 juin 2012 - 02:54
Ageless Face
-
- Members
- 2 786 messages
lDonutsl wrote...
Doesn't the catalyst also say the "the created will always rebel against the creator" or something along those lines? Reapers are created by Reapers, so shouldn't they be in the midst of a reaper civil war right now?
Not nececeraly. For a civil war to happen, we need different opinions.
While the reapers are sentients, somewhat independent, they still have the same goal. The major difference between synthetics and organics by what EDI says is that synthetics have a clear goal ahead, and they operate by it. That means, that even if they are sentients, they still need to act by certain patterns, codes, rules... The reapers' independency is different from ours. It will be more like Legion, or the geth in ME3 after you let legion upload the reaper codes.
Organics, however, are different. They don't have a clear goal, or cause. So they make one for themsleves. So, it creates different opinions, different morals, cultures. All those can lead to a civil war.
I think the catalyst (or BioWare) meant that the synthetic that was created will rebel against his organic creator. Otherwise, it doesn't make sense.
Modifié par HagarIshay, 08 juin 2012 - 02:59 .
#449
Posté 08 juin 2012 - 03:05
Memnon
-
- Members
- 1 405 messages
The child makes no distinction regarding whether creators and created are organics - he makes a flat-out statement of fact, right after he mentions that the Reapers are his solution (creation?) to the problem of "chaos." The child contradicts himself so many times - he refers to the Reapers as his creation then refers to them as 'us' and 'we' (I'm going to keep pointing that out until someone explains why he would do that). He says created will always rebel after hinting that the Reapers are his creation. When Shepard says that he (they) have been killing organics, the child says 'no.' Just like that ... whether or not you believe harvested organics maintain their sentience (I don't), there is no denying that the Reapers ARE killing plenty of organics.
#450
Posté 08 juin 2012 - 03:17
KingZayd
-
- Members
- 5 344 messages
Geneaux486 wrote...
anorling wrote...
Except that's not how the conversation goes. The Catalyst simply tells you what functions the Crucible is capable of, lays all the cards on the table, even the one that kills the Reapers, and explains to you the consequences of each choice. If it were being dishonest, it wouldn't mention the capability to destroy (or control, for that matter), nor would it tell you about the destruction of the Mass Relays were you to choose Synthesis. In fact, if the Catalyst didn't genuinelly believe that this weapon of organic design offered a better solution than his own, he wouldn't have helped Shepard activate the thing at all. Shepard, the in-game character, doesn't believe anything on his or her own, other than that the Crucible must be activated, which is told to that character through the game by most every character. Believing anything about what the Catalyst says regarding the motives and necessity of the Reapers is completely up to the player. That is just one reason why the "Shepard acted out of character" argument fails.
tl;dr that image is a bull**** summation.
None of the dialogue has the Starchild telling Shepard how to activate this weapon, for destroy or control.
