531 réponses à ce sujet

[Zero132132]

IanPolaris wrote...

CaliGuy033 wrote...

Computim wrote...

I'm inclined to believe that, although not possible in THIS cycle, that choosing the rejection ending resulting in a conventional war that was so different than usual and probably resulted in the loss of the citadel, and the Citadel Kid, which would have crippled the main driver of the Reapers, that there really was no future war... I believe, based on the final scene after the credits with the woman and the child that "They fought the war so we didn't have to" means the reapers are gone via conventional means... the crucible didn't work according to Liara, it's in the beacon, so there was obviously a conventional confrontation. It's a bittersweet victory.. but still 'conventional'.

Mike Gamble stated on Twitter that the subsequent cycle beat the Reapers by using the Catalyst/Crucible--i.e., learning from our cycle's mistake in refusing to use it.

Which is a big reason why a lot of people (including me) consider the 'reject' ending a big "FU" by Bioware.

-Polaris

You're right. The way you played the game got everyone Shepard knew or loved killed because he didn't want to make a difficult choice. What, you'd rather future generations aren't allowed to succeed either? You want everyone to lose to the Reapers forever? You want everyone to fail just because you did?

Sure, "FU" seems about right. If you're so whiny that you don't think the next cycle should be allowed to determine their own fate, then what exactly would anything but getting your way say but "FU"?

[CaliGuy033]

Zero132132 wrote...

IanPolaris wrote...

CaliGuy033 wrote...

Computim wrote...

I'm inclined to believe that, although not possible in THIS cycle, that choosing the rejection ending resulting in a conventional war that was so different than usual and probably resulted in the loss of the citadel, and the Citadel Kid, which would have crippled the main driver of the Reapers, that there really was no future war... I believe, based on the final scene after the credits with the woman and the child that "They fought the war so we didn't have to" means the reapers are gone via conventional means... the crucible didn't work according to Liara, it's in the beacon, so there was obviously a conventional confrontation. It's a bittersweet victory.. but still 'conventional'.

Mike Gamble stated on Twitter that the subsequent cycle beat the Reapers by using the Catalyst/Crucible--i.e., learning from our cycle's mistake in refusing to use it.

Which is a big reason why a lot of people (including me) consider the 'reject' ending a big "FU" by Bioware.

-Polaris

You're right. The way you played the game got everyone Shepard knew or loved killed because he didn't want to make a difficult choice. What, you'd rather future generations aren't allowed to succeed either? You want everyone to lose to the Reapers forever? You want everyone to fail just because you did?

Sure, "FU" seems about right. If you're so whiny that you don't think the next cycle should be allowed to determine their own fate, then what exactly would anything but getting your way say but "FU"?

A solid point, frankly. 

[Grifman1]

Goodwood wrote.

As someone who dabbles in military strategy and tactics (most commonly viewed through the lens of historical research), I could list a thousand and one reasons why a so-called "conventional" war against the Reapers could be winnable without the Crucible. It wouldn't be easy, and it wouldn't be quick, but such a thing is very possible. The Reapers have already demonstrated both understanding and blithe ignorance to Sun Tzu's The Art of War, and I have no qualms in saying that Tzu, at least, would have known that victory was within the realm of the possible.

Dabble all you want.  For every one of your "thousand" reasons I can gve a dozen why you can't win.

Let's just start with a very basic fact.  The total number of dreadnoughts in the Turian, Asari, Salarian and human navies, is what, less than 100 ships, or certainly less than 150.  And how many do the Reapers have?  Anyone know?  I'm certain it's in the hundreds at least, maybe thousands (?), and each is superior to any Citadel Council dreadnought one on one.  How do you skin that cat?

Start with this one.

[77boy84]

Conventional victory SHOULD be possible, but that's part of why ME3's story is flawed.

Instead of trying to overcome impossible odds through determination and uniting diverse groups of people together and fitting in with ME1 and 2, you have to assemble a magic space wand off camera to beat the reapers.

The idea that conventional victory is impossible and we can't even try is something that only exists in ME3 to justify the crucible.

[Grifman1]

richard_rider wrote...

How can people call a "conventional" victory ridiculous, impossible, childish, unattainable, etc, but can so easily accept the Deus Ex Machina?

Calling a conventional victory impossible does not mean that I accept Star Child either.  Rejecting one does not mean that accepting the other is required.

[httinks2006]

Allan Schumacher wrote...

Maybe a more pertinent question is:

Is it acceptable that conventional victory is not obtainable?

It's one thing to want to be able to win conventionally. But is the disappointment with it not being possible fed more from the fact that someone wanted it to happen but didn't, or because it realistically doesn't make sense?


I was on the record a couple months ago stating that I agreed with the notion many posters had that refusing the reapers should have been a viable option, but I was also clear in stating that I'd have it result in failure because in my opinion it makes it a more interesting choice. So I'm just asking this to get a better understanding from those that are disappointed.

To answer the op question yes , to answer Allans question no .
current information is suppose to be correct and updated. go to your war room on the Normandy the war assests I collected by Mass Effect ingame  assestments stated I have an even chance that is 50/50 not overwhelming as so many people on these forums are arguing agaisnt a victory without the crucible being possible . no one knew what it did, those are my odds without it .
you can't have your cake and eat it to .

[Zero132132]

Grifman1 wrote...

richard_rider wrote...

How can people call a "conventional" victory ridiculous, impossible, childish, unattainable, etc, but can so easily accept the Deus Ex Machina?

Calling a conventional victory impossible does not mean that I accept Star Child either.  Rejecting one does not mean that accepting the other is required.

The Catalyst isn't a star or a child, but he isn't a deus ex machina either. A Deus ex Machina is some plot contrivance that resolves the entire plot with amazing ease. The Crucible does this. The Catalyst doesn't resolve anything, and actually poses a new problem. So accepting the Crucible is accepting a DEM. Without it, the war isn't winnable if you don't think conventional warfare can bring down the Reapers.

I accepted the Crucible, Catalyst, and that the Reapers aren't defeatable by conventional means, so it doesn't bother me much, but still...

[ZerebusPrime]

So..... I'm going to say no based on the state of the galaxy and the limited number of fleets and resources you could gather. I have EMS over 10,000 thanks to multiplayer bequeathing a great big N7 Spec Ops bonus. I'm pretty sure that my ground forces could beat the living crud out of any and all Reaper landing teams, but there just aren't enough dreadnoughts and great big space guns available to beat the Reaper fleets in this cycle thanks to treaty limitations and the overall political climate of the galaxy. You don't go to war with the military you want; you go to war with the military you have. So unless we can find additional hidden allies X, Y, and Z who just happen to have Reaper killing spaceships (wherefore art thou, Qwib Qwib?) or viable spacerockets of mass destruction, we're lacking what we need to make conventional victory possible.

Now, warn the next cycle properly and you can bet the Yahg or whoever will prepare better. They just have to do so without alerting whatever Reaper or Reapers are left behind to monitor the galaxy until they're ready. We/They'd need thousands of dreadnoughts in space and amassed ground forces with serious heavy weaponry for repelling the smaller Reapers. They'd also need either full control over the Mass Relays or an FTL alternative in case the Reapers try to lock them down.

[sharkboy421]

77boy84 wrote...

Conventional victory SHOULD be possible, but that's part of why ME3's story is flawed.

Instead of trying to overcome impossible odds through determination and uniting diverse groups of people together and fitting in with ME1 and 2, you have to assemble a magic space wand off camera to beat the reapers.

The idea that conventional victory is impossible and we can't even try is something that only exists in ME3 to justify the crucible.

I agree.  The idea of the crucible seems so very "meh" and for much less interesting than the idea of the galaxy fighting as a unified group.  Sure both concepts are very cliched: go find the magic sword to kill the dragon and if we stand together we will win, but I find the later to be more fulfilling. I also feel that it would fit better with the tone of ME.

Also there is the issue that Bioware has kept the actual size of the Reaper armada so vague.  The Reapers are as strong/weak as the plot needs them to be.  Which in a game that had been very detailed oriented up until this point, that just comes off as lazy and disappointing.  There were some threads floating around here that gave estimates on both the size of the allied fleets and the Reapers, which while interesting proved just how vague the writing was. 

Though I have to admit I was disappointed that there was no conventional victory.  After all Shep has done pulled off several amazing feets with nothing more than her own skill and a little luck, so why not a third time?  Dammit I wanted to see Shep swagger out like boss with that cheeky little smirk one last time.

[Computim]

Next up: Extended Cut DLC Pt 2. They'll charge 1600pts for this one and give Sharkboy his swagger scene ;p

[Alexraptor1]

I think there should have been more to the rejection ending.
Like a cutscene showing the reapers mopping up the last resistance and comrades and friends in despair as they get impaled on dragon's teeth or melted down into organic goo, etc.

[Computim]

Alexraptor1 wrote...

I think there should have been more to the rejection ending.
Like a cutscene showing the reapers mopping up the last resistance and comrades and friends in despair as they get impaled on dragon's teeth or melted down into organic goo, etc.

....they're not melted down.. they're incorporated into the reapers...

for the greater good.

[Allan Schumacher]

VII Revenant wrote...

In terms of gameplay, a high enough EMS rating and a visual deployment, command, or assist with those resources, alongside a compliment of intense player-driven choices would have been a great way to make conventional victory achievable with an extreme cost to player resources.

As players do not have such a degree of control over the battlefield situation at the game's end, the current decision to deny players conventional victory with the Reject Ending is acceptable. I believe much of the disappointment stems from it not being possible and the seeming uselessness of our gathered resources at game's end. By having an ending in which conventional victory is achievable, you would give tangible value to those resources instead of merely assigning them a numerical value. My Krogan allies, for example, would mean more than a slight bump in EMS, and I, as Shepard, would value their sacrifice and commitment greater.

That's an interesting response.  Thanks!

I do agree that the EMS value isn't as clear as it maybe could be.  Especially in terms of what it fed into.  Based on how the game uses the EMS, it definitely ties more into the Crucible's capability rather than the military capability of the fleet itself.  I love naval warfare and associated the EMS with military might as well, and it didn't become apparent to me until I read up on what the EMS affected in the game.


I just asked because in reality, the ME team "could" have done literally anything they wanted.  It could have been more fleshed out.  I know Epler made a comment that he would have liked to see the fleets go down in a blaze of glory too, though as a CinDesigner himself he mentioned he can understand why there might have been limitations in place in terms of size as well as time and money.


What about if we take into account scarcity and assume that there was fixed time/budget and that all the resources were spent.  What would people be willing to take away from the other endings in order to improve the refuse one?

[Andromidius]

Conventional? No.

Unconventional? Yes.

But what is conventional? Krogan and Turians, Geth and Quarians, Humans and Batarians? Hardly. Unconventional doesn't mean 'grasping for straws' with an unknown superweapon which is gift wrapped at exactly the right moment when everyone is desperate enough to use it. It means using unusual tactics, new technology, working with people you previously considered enemies to fight the greater evil.

To all those people who just say 'no', I think you give up too easily. And siding with the Reapers and going along with their plans is the biggest betrayal ever commited in the galaxy's history.

[Allan Schumacher]

httinks2006 wrote...

Allan Schumacher wrote...

Maybe a more pertinent question is:

Is it acceptable that conventional victory is not obtainable?

It's one thing to want to be able to win conventionally. But is the disappointment with it not being possible fed more from the fact that someone wanted it to happen but didn't, or because it realistically doesn't make sense?


I was on the record a couple months ago stating that I agreed with the notion many posters had that refusing the reapers should have been a viable option, but I was also clear in stating that I'd have it result in failure because in my opinion it makes it a more interesting choice. So I'm just asking this to get a better understanding from those that are disappointed.

To answer the op question yes , to answer Allans question no .
current information is suppose to be correct and updated. go to your war room on the Normandy the war assests I collected by Mass Effect ingame  assestments stated I have an even chance that is 50/50 not overwhelming as so many people on these forums are arguing agaisnt a victory without the crucible being possible . no one knew what it did, those are my odds without it .
you can't have your cake and eat it to .

A 50/50 chance doesn't guarantee victory by any means though.  Unless you're hoping for actual random variation (sometimes saying no results in winning, other times it results in dying - note: This starts to become a nightmare to work with...), a 50/50 chance means that it's entirely acceptable that winning by conventional means doesn't work.  It was a coin flip, and you're only getting one toss.

[Computim]

Allan Schumacher wrote...

A 50/50 chance doesn't guarantee victory by any means though.  Unless you're hoping for actual random variation (sometimes saying no results in winning, other times it results in dying - note: This starts to become a nightmare to work with...), a 50/50 chance means that it's entirely acceptable that winning by conventional means doesn't work.  It was a coin flip, and you're only getting one toss.

Next up - Championship Poker with Harbinger Vs Shepard - Winner takes the galaxy.

[sH0tgUn jUliA]

No.

Why? Because of several things:

1) Hudson & Walters made the Council and the the military "geniuses" about as intelligent as chimpanzees. If a person had an IQ of higher than 80 they were barred from serving.

2) They violated the lore. They allowed the reapers to travel about 100,000 ly in the time period between the end of ME2 and Arrival @ 30 ly/day without fuel considerations using the patented ** space magic ** drive from dark space to the Alpha Relay. It should have taken around 10 yrs.

3) If there were IQs higher than 80 around this would have given more than enough time to build some big assed ships with some big assed thanix cannons (reaper sized), and some reaper quality shields from the stuff from Sovereign.

4) This would have given enough time for Javik to have been found on Eden Prime, and some further research to be done on Mars and I'm sure Liara would have discovered something that pointed to Thessia, or at least Javik might have known something about the beacon on Thessia. Now this may have allowed for some far better preparation, and more evidence.

5) And if they're worried about the "economy" when it comes to survival, deficits don't matter.

But since I didn't write the story, and Walters and Hudson did, we have to work with what we were given.

And the answer to the question, "Could the reapers have been defeated conventionally?"

Answer: Given the way the story was written, no.

[ExSturminator]

Allan Schumacher wrote...

A 50/50 chance doesn't guarantee victory by any means though.  Unless you're hoping for actual random variation (sometimes saying no results in winning, other times it results in dying - note: This starts to become a nightmare to work with...), a 50/50 chance means that it's entirely acceptable that winning by conventional means doesn't work.  It was a coin flip, and you're only getting one toss.

I'll admit I haven't been through this whole argument and am just responding to this specific statement, but I'd just like to point out the obvious that Mass Effect is story driven and these 50/50 stats don't really mean much to what the writers decide to do.  Mass Effect 2 was a "suicide mission" yet with a little due dilligence, no one died, the ship was relatively undamaged, and you came away from the whole thing smelling rosy fresh (which I was happy with mind you).

I recognize that conventional victory is supposed to seem unobtainable to rationalize creation of the Crucible in the first place, but it would be a fascinating and uplifting twist (one that matched the themes of unification and perserverance mind you) for Shepard to realize the Crucible was a trap or a bad option and rally the fleet that he'd gathered to build and defend it to actually fight back and beat the Reapers.  It matches the whole "against all odds" thing Bioware's been running with since the first game, and gives fans the moral dilemna of taking an easy out with stipulations in the form of the Catalyst, or sending brave soldiers to die in the hopes of conventional victory.

Just saying, from a storytelling perspective, arguing this on statistics isn't really the way to go.

Modifié par ExSturminator, 28 juin 2012 - 12:55 .

[zenoxis]

Of course it's possible, there are tons of threads on this already. The fact that it doesn't exist is just a matter of lack of creativity on Bioware's part.

[Emphyr]

I havent been online lately..and didnt read a lot..

Refuse is for me personally the best ending.

What will happen if Shepard leaves the citadel after refusing to starkid..we evacuate all ppl and blow up the citadel.. Starkid says its his home and he controls the reapers.

Maybe the next cycle started with blowing the citadel to atoms if we didnt do that ?

Maybe more ppl thought about this and it has been discussed already. Ifso can i please have the links .

Edit: thought of it after posting..I think i recall blowing up the citadel will stop ore explode the Mass Relays ?

Sorry i am tired and reding on a notebook in my bed. Its 03.39 night here.

Take Care.

Modifié par Emphyr, 28 juin 2012 - 01:39 .

[ExSturminator]

zenoxis wrote...

Of course it's possible, there are tons of threads on this already. The fact that it doesn't exist is just a matter of lack of creativity on Bioware's part.

In defense of Bioware, I would like to make one quick point about this.  Cinematics and voice acting take a lot of time and resources, and what we're discussing is a completely divergent course from the big three.  In the current endings, a lot of resources are reusable.  The Normandy fleeing, the different colored space waves, the troops on the ground, the panel sequence, the Normandy stranded scene.  In a conventional victory ending, NONE of that could be used.

EC was a big thing because it added unique cinematics (not many but some) to each of the endings, like the Reapers under Shepard's control or the allied fleet setting out from the Sol system.  A conventional victory ending would require a HUGE battle sequence, unique content for Shepard surviving, the crew on Earth, no damage to the relays, an intact Citadel, etc.  The list goes on and on in terms of what they'd have to make, and NONE of it could be swapped elsewhere to save drive space or time.

So, do I personally wish I could see a conventional victory ending?  Definitely.  Do I get why its not there?  Yes.  Do I blame Bioware?  Not really, though you guys could put in some weekends and go the extra mile 

[Welsh Inferno]

This cycle being capable of beating the Reapers via conventional means would have broken the entire story for me personally. Just as much as the original endings did.

But to each their own I guess.

Modifié par Welsh Inferno, 28 juin 2012 - 01:05 .

[richard_rider]

Grifman1 wrote...

richard_rider wrote...

How can people call a "conventional" victory ridiculous, impossible, childish, unattainable, etc, but can so easily accept the Deus Ex Machina?

Calling a conventional victory impossible does not mean that I accept Star Child either.  Rejecting one does not mean that accepting the other is required.

That's not what everyone in this thread is saying, "conventional victory is impossible, only catalyst/cruicible solution is possible" If you reject that conventional victory is impossible, then you accept that only the star brat can stop the reapers.

[kj0600]

I don't know I feel like the current cycle could have done it.
A good chunk of reaper forces gathered in the Sol system, a giant sacrifice could have been made by destroying the Sol relay and thus the system. Now the rest of the reaper forces would be scattered. With most of races united, plus a high EMS, I believe it should have happened.

I like the reject ending as it is, but I feel like it could have gone that extra mile with a win by 'conventional' means.

Modifié par kj0600, 28 juin 2012 - 01:11 .

[Kileyan]

If conventional victory is not possible, why in the world is the game filled with tons of ships and combat units to collect, and a multiplayer game built around raising that score level?

It appears the whole time we were playing, the reapers were just sandbagging. The very second we defy the 3 colors ending, the reapers go BLAM BLAM BLAM, game over man, everyone is dead. It comes across as they could have won easily at anytime.

It isn't so much that I feel conventional victory should be or had to be possible, it is just that core parts of the game seem so pointless and designed for a different possibility than the 3 colors.

Modifié par Kileyan, 28 juin 2012 - 01:26 .