332 réponses à ce sujet

[filetemo]

Lone Triarii wrote...

soapmode wrote...

I got the secret 'Mass Effect Has Stopped Working' ending, by walking into the Crucible backwards. :S

That one’s my favourite.

LOL

[w4rguy349]

3DandBeyond wrote...

w4rguy349 wrote...

jengelb1 wrote...

w4rguy349 wrote...

1. The Normandy is equipped with arguably the most advanced stealth system in the galaxy, not to mention the integrated Reaper IFF. As for the galaxy map, it was mentioned that scanning planets would make the Normandy's presence known to the reapers and drives them to "investigate", not "OMG THERES THE NORMANDY EAT IT!"

Stealth blocks it from sensors. It's not a cloaking device. The ship is still clearly visible.

That whole scene reminded me of "Scotty don't" from Austin Powers.

Ah but reapers do not see as organics see, they use the sensors you mentioned to gather data and make it "visual". bypass/disrupt said sensors and all they can "see" at most is a very faint image.

But i digress, as i doubt bioware thought of that and it was likely just eye candy.

Oh but he sees a human being running along the ground.  And he sees tanks.

i should probably label these as theories so people better understand that im not forcing it as truth.

THEORY for 1. in reply to your post, his sensors are detecting the humans and tanks, you are aware they dont have stealth technology, right?

although for those of us who played infiltrators, they shouldve let us TC our way through


then again, those darned geth see through TC, so harbinger probably could too, hrmm

[w4rguy349]

soapmode wrote...

I got the secret 'Mass Effect Has Stopped Working' ending, by walking into the Crucible backwards. :S

what about the 'EA servers are down, now closing ME3' ending?

[Lextra]

i could answer atleast 30 of these questions, but its to much text and after the first few i saw that you are just hating

[jdckelly]

the only one that bugs me is Harbinger not shooting down the Normandy, its right in front of you and is a big target! You've been hitting pretty much anything else moving with little effort.

[w4rguy349]

Lextra wrote...

i could answer atleast 30 of these questions, but its to much text and after the first few i saw that you are just hating

i clarified the first 39 for you, i skimmed through the rest and found they were either the same as the previous ones, or just too wild to bother answering.

[NightAntilli]

Darkeus wrote...

And you guys love to ignore all of the plot holes and illogical points.  I would love to be like you, living in a blissful and obediant world....

You can be. It's simple. Stop turning mosquitoes into elephants.. 

[ThatDancingTurian]

Here's one: Why are there krogan nuclear families being shown when krogan have babies in clutches of like a thousand? Why did that one baby get picked over its brothers and sisters to be part of a picturesque, anthropocentric family unit?

Modifié par Aris Ravenstar, 27 juin 2012 - 01:17 .

[7he Island Head]

w4rguy349 wrote...

Lextra wrote...

i could answer atleast 30 of these questions, but its to much text and after the first few i saw that you are just hating

i clarified the first 39 for you, i skimmed through the rest and found they were either the same as the previous ones, or just too wild to bother answering.

You just made up a whole bunch of stuff. You didn't clarify anything!

[Astralify]

You should post this on HTL, OP. I have the feeling that BiowEAre might delete this topic.

[w4rguy349]

This topic needs a name change, almost everything here isnt plotholes, its just teeny tiny insignificant details that would never change anyones opinion of the game

[JpL]

Shepard being wounded same place as he shot Anderson!

[w4rguy349]

7he Island Head wrote...

w4rguy349 wrote...

Lextra wrote...

i could answer atleast 30 of these questions, but its to much text and after the first few i saw that you are just hating

i clarified the first 39 for you, i skimmed through the rest and found they were either the same as the previous ones, or just too wild to bother answering.

You just made up a whole bunch of stuff. You didn't clarify anything!

the real point was i connected the dots in a logical manner, whereas nearly everyone else in the fanbase is stuck inside the hatebox

i found the key, and was nice enough to leave it behind, its up to you to find it and unlock a whole new amazing point of view.

(yes i pulled that from aladdin, loved that movie)

[Xellith]

Why was shepard like "what do I need to do?" or w/e while bleeding to death.

And then in the next scene he is like "lol just kiddin im okay".

[w4rguy349]

Xellith wrote...

Why was shepard like "what do I need to do?" or w/e while bleeding to death.

And then in the next scene he is like "lol just kiddin im okay".

the answer is quite obvious: because hes commander fricken shepard!


anywho. were straying off topic, lets stick to actual plotholes

[mcguireptr1]

Identifing these plot holes is not nitpicking. Nitpicking would be saying something like all the bodies on the citadel look the same. The rest of these are legitamet problems, holes, or inconsistencies to the established lore. The ending was an epic fail to a great game and great series, and to all who like the end or have no problem with it, I can only assume you were not emotionally invested into this game or actually like plot holes and lack of closure, something bioware promised for this DLC but did not deliver.

[Father_Jerusalem]

And yet again, only by squinting and looking at it askew and deliberately misinterpreting things and simply not using logic, you manage to find a bunch of "plot holes".

Well done.

Hint: just because you don't (or are incapable of or refuse to) understand these things, it doesn't make them plot holes.

[MissMaster_2]

Father_Jerusalem wrote...

And yet again, only by squinting and looking at it askew and deliberately misinterpreting things and simply not using logic, you manage to find a bunch of "plot holes".

Well done.

Hint: just because you don't (or are incapable of or refuse to) understand these things, it doesn't make them plot holes.

LOL! WHAT? Herby letting the Normandy go is not nitpicking.D
during this time Herby is not shooting lasers he is just watching them. He sees them. So why the heck does he let them go? He was feeling nice in that moment? 

A big ass explosion on the Citidel not killing Shepard some how is not nitpicking these are plotholes that go against the lore of the Mass Effect universe.

Modifié par MissMaster_2, 27 juin 2012 - 02:01 .

[w4rguy349]

mcguireptr1 wrote...

Identifing these plot holes is not nitpicking. Nitpicking would be saying something like all the bodies on the citadel look the same. The rest of these are legitamet problems, holes, or inconsistencies to the established lore. The ending was an epic fail to a great game and great series, and to all who like the end or have no problem with it, I can only assume you were not emotionally invested into this game or actually like plot holes and lack of closure, something bioware promised for this DLC but did not deliver.

A plot hole is something that is inconsistent with the story and cannot be explained logically. I took the first 39 and gave logical theories to a handful of them, hence they are not true plot holes

Here is an example of a plot hole taken from Lord of the Rings: The Twin Towers

During the Helm's Deep sequence, there were platoons of elves defending the stronghold. Sometime during the sequence they are seen retreating to the inner workings of the fortress, and then after all is said and done they are simply gone without a trace.

Now one could say that they were killed off during the attack, but that is not logical as it was shown that the bulk of their forces retreated to safety. it could also be said that they had departed by then, but that too is illogical as a force that large could not have simply vanished.

again, if you think from a mass effect perspective alot of my theories make sense, and the true plot holes i actually expanded into bigger plot holes. in the end only a few of these "plot holes" even matter

and dont assume we werent emotionally attached, after going through the synthesis ending (which seems to be the favorite turd) i was choked up, EDI was the best possible candidate for expanding the synthesis ending. I personally am not going to youtube the others as i would like to experience them myself, but at the end of the day i get the jist of them anyway.

not once did i say i enjoyed the ending, but you are fooling yourself if the EC didnt bring some form of closure. The most important detail anyone cares about is how their choices affected the end, and i saw some that did affect it:

1. obviously anyone who i managed to keep alive throughout the series was there and anyone who was dead was dead

2. having chosen synthesis, the repears no longer needed to continue the cycle, and chose to live alongside the mass effect lifeforms, being shown rebuilding their homes and apparently the mass relays in the other endings (synthesis didnt show it, or i missed it)

3. having settled the war between the geth and quarians and bringing peace between the two, it was shown that the geth and quarians were living in coexistence on rhannok, rebuilding together.

4. having cured the genophage, the krogan were shown recovering their numbers, with an abundance of female krogan in the slideshow and 1 or 2 krogan children which is more than enough to signify the genophage is truly cured.

5. by choosing synthesis my shepard died, although this was already obvious they pinned the nail in the coffin with the plaque.

those were some of the things i noticed from my playthrough, all of which had significant impact from the beginning of the game, some even from the beginning of the series. (for example, you cannot bring peace between the geth and the quarians without having played through ME2, hell maybe even ME1)

ill go ahead and stop here since this is already a wall of text in itself.

[Father_Jerusalem]

MissMaster_2 wrote...

Father_Jerusalem wrote...

And yet again, only by squinting and looking at it askew and deliberately misinterpreting things and simply not using logic, you manage to find a bunch of "plot holes".

Well done.

Hint: just because you don't (or are incapable of or refuse to) understand these things, it doesn't make them plot holes.

LOL! WHAT? Herby letting the Normandy go is not nitpicking.D
during this time Herby is not shooting lasers he is just watching them. He sees them. So why the heck does he let them go? He was feeling nice in that moment? 

A big ass explosion on the Citidel not killing Shepard some how is not nitpicking these are plotholes that go against the lore of the Mass Effect universe.

One piddly ship flying AWAY from the Conduit and TOWARDS the giant ass Reaper armada... and Harby decides to keep his focus on the Conduit so as to prevent anyone from getting on board the Citadel... you're right. Damn. Total plot hole. Could NEVER be understood by anyone why that would happen. WHY DO YOU CURSE US SO, BioWare! WHY!

A big ass explosion on the Citadel not killing Shepard... well, okay that is a plot hole... so, tell me, how DID Shepard manage to survive a big ass explosion and a bunch of debris falling on him... in Mass Effect 1?

[TudorWolf]

There's a few things around the Normandy that have been mentioned.

I mean, seriously, Shepard takes a time out from the charge to call in Joker (who arrives practically instantly, where the hell was he?!), and while everyone is standing there chatting, Harbinger is obligingly standing in the background doing... nothing? Could that have been more awkward?

And the whole justification for fleeing from the crucible is... what? It's like "Crucible is about to fire, RUN"... despite the fact that they should know it'll effect the whole galaxy by doing something to the relays (mentioned in the codex entry, and it would be pretty worthless to them if it only affected Sol anyway). Not to mention that Earth is right there. If they think the Crucible firing is going to have negative effects, then by this logic Earth will be screwed.

And they removed the part where we see the Normandy actually get damaged (I maintain that this is caused due to relay travel when the beam hits, but I digress). So they crash... then leave again. All this seems to achieve is getting the squadmates out of the way and thus leaving their eventual fates ambiguous

Modifié par TudorWolf, 27 juin 2012 - 02:20 .

[w4rguy349]

MissMaster_2 wrote...

Father_Jerusalem wrote...

And yet again, only by squinting and looking at it askew and deliberately misinterpreting things and simply not using logic, you manage to find a bunch of "plot holes".

Well done.

Hint: just because you don't (or are incapable of or refuse to) understand these things, it doesn't make them plot holes.

LOL! WHAT? Herby letting the Normandy go is not nitpicking.D
during this time Herby is not shooting lasers he is just watching them. He sees them. So why the heck does he let them go? He was feeling nice in that moment? 

A big ass explosion on the Citidel not killing Shepard some how is not nitpicking these are plotholes that go against the lore of the Mass Effect universe.

i gave some possible logical theories as to why harby didnt shoot the normandy, hence not a plot hole

although it should be quite obvious that the whole scene was just eye candy, yet here we are making it more than that.

lets see, the citadel explosion didnt magically make the quarians and geth go at eachothers throats again, or bring back the genophage, or for synthesis make the reapers want to continue the cycle again, so tell me how was the lore deceived?

[Bamboozald]

mcguireptr1 wrote...

Identifing these plot holes is not nitpicking. Nitpicking would be saying something like all the bodies on the citadel look the same. The rest of these are legitamet problems, holes, or inconsistencies to the established lore. The ending was an epic fail to a great game and great series, and to all who like the end or have no problem with it, I can only assume you were not emotionally invested into this game or actually like plot holes and lack of closure, something bioware promised for this DLC but did not deliver.

If this is the case, then I will have to assume that those who dont like the ending lack an imagination or care too much about the series, so much so, that they will tear down Bioware until they get the ending they invisioned. (Yet I am not going to do so because making such assumptions is not only demeaning to everyone--but just wrong.)

I would argue that your assumption is wrong because I am deeply emotionally invested in this game; however, so are the people who made the game over the past couple years and they have the ultimate say in what happens. I think Bioware delivered a good DLC that helped to further explain their vision of the universe and end of the series (nitpick and plotholes in all). Although I have my own questions that could use some answers, I gladly accept what Bioware has made (regardless of not having answers), because it helped me see what they wanted and how they wanted to end  the universe they created and care about.

Was it the best ending to a series? No, because I imagined events going a different direction, but don't forget, this game isn't ours to control or demand to go in a certain direction. I accept Bioware's choice and will respect it. But I hope others will try to understand it from Bioware's perspective and not destroy a great series just because it doesn't match personal renditions of the the story.

[Bamboozald]

Father_Jerusalem wrote...

And yet again, only by squinting and looking at it askew and deliberately misinterpreting things and simply not using logic, you manage to find a bunch of "plot holes".

Well done.

Hint: just because you don't (or are incapable of or refuse to) understand these things, it doesn't make them plot holes.

Bravo, good Sir, bravo. Probably a better post than the long one I just made.

[TK EL_]

w4rguy349 wrote...

MissMaster_2 wrote...

Father_Jerusalem wrote...

And yet again, only by squinting and looking at it askew and deliberately misinterpreting things and simply not using logic, you manage to find a bunch of "plot holes".

Well done.

Hint: just because you don't (or are incapable of or refuse to) understand these things, it doesn't make them plot holes.

LOL! WHAT? Herby letting the Normandy go is not nitpicking.D
during this time Herby is not shooting lasers he is just watching them. He sees them. So why the heck does he let them go? He was feeling nice in that moment? 

A big ass explosion on the Citidel not killing Shepard some how is not nitpicking these are plotholes that go against the lore of the Mass Effect universe.

i gave some possible logical theories as to why harby didnt shoot the normandy, hence not a plot hole

although it should be quite obvious that the whole scene was just eye candy, yet here we are making it more than that.

lets see, the citadel explosion didnt magically make the quarians and geth go at eachothers throats again, or bring back the genophage, or for synthesis make the reapers want to continue the cycle again, so tell me how was the lore deceived?

Thats the fr****** point. The fact that you have to come up with THEORIES for something that is so simple and straightforward probably means its just bad. There is no simple explanation to why he did not just blast them. He actually just stopped doing anything. Also calling in the Normandy makes NO sense whatsoever, it was an all or nothing play, a hail mary. You can like the ending and the EC for all anyone cares, just don't come here and pretend like your kind cares about plot consistency or logic