338 réponses à ce sujet

[KingJason13]

P.S.- For the record: I thought the EC was a MASSIVE improvement over the original ending. I had just wondered if anyone else thought the extraction was odd...

[Isichar]

iAFKinMassEffect3 wrote...

Isichar wrote...

Im sorry but you guys need to look at the facts.

Fact: If 1 person makes it to the beam, the reapers are done. If no one makes it to the beam then we lose. End of story. If that does not matter to you then why bother fighting the war to begin with?

I don't care whether or not Harby would be interested in shooting down Normandy, I care that your 10 seconds away from the end of the war and you stop well everyone is getting slaughtered so you can focus on your crew.

If you want the story to reach so far in order to save the ground crew and have them appear on the final scene with the Normandy then OK. I'm not upset my ground crew made it out alive, in fact I'm not upset at all. Even if it is not very logical to me it still answers the question as to why it happened.

And if the normandy dropped off a Hammerhead the Reapers are done.
If the normandy dropped off any vechicle the Reapers are done.

If a supercarrier came down and dropped off a squadron then the Reapers are done.
If a supercarrier came down an dropped off 50 shuttles then the Reapers are done.

Instead of helping end the war the normandy is evacuating the people that are charging the beam. Pretty disrespectful for everyone who died just so we could get to that point.

[Druzgot]

XFeroxX wrote...

iAFKinMassEffect3 wrote...

shepdog77 wrote...

Han Shot First wrote...

This isn't as unrealistic as some make it out to be.

Even during the amphibious assaults on places like Normandy, Tarawa, or Iwo Jima during the Second World War, there were landing craft and amtracs evacuating the more seriously wounded while the beach head was still very much contested and under fire. So the evac itself isn't a problem.

The difference of course is that these landing craft and amtracs were usually under fire as well, unlike the Normandy. But there are circumstances in the game to explain why the Normandy does not come under fire. Harbinger was probably preoccupied with the large numbers of dismounted infantry, gunships, and tanks that were close to the beam. As the Citadel was not garrisoned with Reaper troops, any one of these people could have potentially foiled the Reapers plans. The Normandy on the hand, was simply evacuating wounded and not directly aiding the push for the beam. It was simply not a priority target at that time. As noted by one of the posters above me, Harbinger is still firing during that sequence. You can hear it in the background. He just isn't firing at the Normandy.

Think of it as a gamer: Lets say you are playing as Harbinger during that sequence, and you've got all these troops and tanks and gunships rushing the beam. If even one makes it to the beam you lose the game. They are coming at the beam almost faster than you can fire, and you've almost got too many targets to take care of. You are getting twitchy and have to button mash to just to get them all. In the middle of that are you going to run the risk of shifting your fire from them to the Normandy in the background, which is playing no role in the beam rush?

A voice of reason who doesn't bash the endings?!?! BLASPHEMY!!!!!

That's not a reason, that is lies.

There is 1 run down and 1 path, Harbinger was capable of firing multiple shots at a time with great power killing loads of troops instantly.
The Normandy flies by and lands on the battlefield.


It reminds me of games like Call of duty.
Do you shoot the chopper dropping the troops or do you shoot the troops? I think we all know the answer.

But the Normandy isn't dropping troops. I got into a huge debate with another guy on a thread exactly like this. If I were Harbinger, I'd likely have 3 things going on in my head. 

1) The beam is causing massive interference for everybody

2) Nobody can reach that beam, if something is helping them get away from the beam all the better

3) The Reaper IFF along with any help EDI can give would at least put up a question mark over Normandy if not totally trick the Reaper. 

Also, nearly the entire remainder of Hammer was making that push, thats still a lot of people making that rush. 

So you're in Harbinger's squid boots, who do you shoot? The closest threats to the beam, or a ship that is blocked by interference, with questionable alliegance, taking troops away from that push, that would require shifting resources to that location away from those closer to the beam or do you shoot the nearest threat? Either way this argument as to why it DIDN'T gets when it SHOULD have doesn't matter one bit, because as we can see, the Normandy does not in any way get shot. So leave it at that and accept what a world of fiction has given you.

THIS,THIS,THIS . I cant believe that people complain about this scene.... It had perfect sense. This moment decided about fate of whole war, Harbringer cound risk that someone will get to the beam because he "wasted" one shot on ship running away

And to the previous comment reaper beam can kill 7-15 people at one time but they were spread around. Shepard didnt die from destroyer beam and he was like 1,5 metres from it

Modifié par Druzgot, 04 juillet 2012 - 07:23 .

[Isichar]

KingJason13 wrote...

P.S.- For the record: I thought the EC was a MASSIVE improvement over the original ending. I had just wondered if anyone else thought the extraction was odd...

Same here, I really enjoyed the EC, just thought that the normandy evac scene was... well lets just say odd.

[Versus Omnibus]

BrookerT wrote...

just gonna repeat myself here:
"Why didn't Saren Kill Shepard when he held him by the neck? Cool emotional scenes don't have to be logical to be good"

The only one here who seems to be making sense.

[im commander shep]

Considering Harby has a thing for shep you would think he would have one pop at him and the normandy. Also he does seem to make short work of all the troops rushing the beam. Still does seem rather odd especially as how does he know that the normandy won't just start shooting. Why does the normandy not just start shooting for that matter blast harby take the heat of the troops some have got to get through then?

[Sniktchtherat]

Scepsis wrote...

Sniktchtherat wrote...

Actually, the major problem with the evac is:

THE SR2 IS NOT LANDING-CAPABLE. Per EDI in Mass Effect 2, the SR2 is nearly twice the mass of the SR1, and is no longer capable of atmospheric maneuver. Never retconned, never handwaved, just overriden by the Will Of Casey.

The Normandy was upgraded by the Alliance. Who's to say it can't make a groundside extraction now?

It never technically landed either, it hovered. 

The problem is this is an exemplar of the care the current writers took in shaping the whole game - and in doing so discarding most of 1 and 2.  Technically, there was no need for them to explain the reason behind having shuttles in Mass Effect 2 - but they did.

Because details matter.  Especially in talky-techy scifi.

[BrookerT]

Scepsis wrote...

BrookerT wrote...

just gonna repeat myself here:
"Why didn't Saren Kill Shepard when he held him by the neck? Cool emotional scenes don't have to be logical to be good"

/thread

At least a few people look at my posts:crying:

[Village_Idiot]

The rationale for Harbinger not shooting the Normandy does make sense. What it doesn't excuse is why this wasn't explained better in the scene, a brief shot showing Harbinger tearing through the troops at the front would have been enough.

The scene is fine with an application of afterthought, but at the time it seemed absurd. And you only get one shot at a first impression.

Modifié par Shadrach 88, 04 juillet 2012 - 07:25 .

[legion999]

BrookerT wrote...

just gonna repeat myself here:
"Why didn't Saren Kill Shepard when he held him by the neck? Cool emotional scenes don't have to be logical to be good"

I didn't know Saren could snap peoples necks with one hand while holding them for about five seconds.

And Saren isn't a 2km AI dreadnought who would shoot down enemy ships easily.

Modifié par legion999, 04 juillet 2012 - 07:24 .

[Ticonderoga117]

Sniktchtherat wrote...

Actually, the major problem with the evac is:

THE SR2 IS NOT LANDING-CAPABLE. Per EDI in Mass Effect 2, the SR2 is nearly twice the mass of the SR1, and is no longer capable of atmospheric maneuver. Never retconned, never handwaved, just overriden by the Will Of Casey.

So the beginning is crap too. I already knew that, but this just adds to it.

Anyway, why would Harbinger not fire at a ship that is providing reinforcements and evac? If he toasts the Normandy, not only does he get rid of the ship that totally messed up his last idea, but the explosion would totally disrupt the beam charge and eliminate a threat to himself. Remember folks, Reaper shields while landed are MUCH weaker.

While I enjoy the scene (those feels!) it probably would've been easier and more sensical to junk Jungle planet scene and re-do those bits.

[Isichar]

[quote]Druzgot wrote...

[quote]XFeroxX wrote...

[quote]iAFKinMassEffect3 wrote...

[quote]shepdog77 wrote...

[quote]Han Shot First wrote...

[/quote]

THIS,THIS,THIS . I cant believe that people complain about this scene.... It had perfect sense. This moment decided about fate of whole war, Harbringer cound risk that someone will get to the beam because he "wasted" one shot on ship running away

And to the previous comment reaper beam can kill 7-15 people at one time but they were spread around. Shepard didnt die from destroyer beam and he was like 1,5 metres from it

[/quote]

To clarify not everyone who dislikes this scene, dislikes it for that reason.

Harby ignoring Shepard and the Normandy on that moment had nothing whatsoever to do with why I think the scene was badly handled.


edit: Sorry iono why its doing the quote thing...

Modifié par Isichar, 04 juillet 2012 - 07:25 .

[im commander shep]

Versus Omnibus wrote...

BrookerT wrote...

just gonna repeat myself here:
"Why didn't Saren Kill Shepard when he held him by the neck? Cool emotional scenes don't have to be logical to be good"

The only one here who seems to be making sense.

Thats called The James Bond Law. The bad guy never kills the hero when he has the chance and in the end pays for it.

[BrookerT]

legion999 wrote...

BrookerT wrote...

just gonna repeat myself here:
"Why didn't Saren Kill Shepard when he held him by the neck? Cool emotional scenes don't have to be logical to be good"

I didn't know Saren could snap peopless necks with one hand while holding them for about five seconds.

And Saren isn't a 2km AI dreadnought who would shoot down enemy ships easily.

He threw down his gun when charging to Shepard. What Kind of villain THROWS AWAY THERE WEAPON when there enemey who they just tried to kill is defenslesss. Hell, if you go save the Salarian team, He holds him over an effing cliff

Im mean seriously watch the begining of this clip 
 

Modifié par BrookerT, 04 juillet 2012 - 07:28 .

[TudorWolf]

Versus Omnibus wrote...

Even in the original they stopped. Coats can be heard on the radio telling what little of Hammer to full back into the buildings because Harbinger was killing everyone. The plan was failing and if it had continued there would be nobody left.

By stopping that plan, saving those we could, and falling back we still had a chance the next time around.

That's great... but there won't be a next time. Rushing the beam was the only chance, it's all or nothing. That fails and the reapers win this battle, meaning all you did was for naught because the fleets will be decimated and the Crucible never deployed.

I can appreciate what Bioware were trying to do here, but that scene caused more issues than it solved. Even if Harbinger is focusing on the ground forces, he doesn't seem particularly troubled with stopping them with his multi-fire laser. What's stopping him from firing at the Normandy as well as the ground?
Also, Harbinger is the one capital class reaper shown to have visible "eyes", yet we're supposed to believe he doesn't see the Normandy? The cutscene outright shows him "looking" right at Shep/Normandy before he rejoins the charge. Yet Harbinger literally just stands there doing absolutely nothing while Normandy flies off right in front of him.

[Rhiens VI]

KingJason13 wrote...

WTH did Harbinger stop firing long enough to let the Normandy fly in, park in front of him, let a tearful goodbye occur, NOT shoot the totally exposed enemy warship that has plagued him for 2 games, let them fly awkwardly away... and then resume firing at the ant-sized people on the ground!?

Maybe he was distracted? Maybe he got a few Thanix missiles up his butt?

Seriously, why do you care?

Are you nitpicking every goddamn scene of an action movie with the same fervor?

Some people...

[iAFKinMassEffect3]

I think you're missing the point.
Why wouldn't a logical person think a heavy vehicle landing on a battlefield is not going to drop off troops.
It doesn't mean it will, but why won't Harbinger think that.

It reminds me of games where you can defeat the enemy easy if you play right.
If Harbinger shot the Normandy it probably would've blown up killing not only everyone on board but also killing all the troops rushing pass.
The blast would've been fairly big.

There is only benefits in shooting the Normandy and the Reapers would be crazy to assume this vehicle was going to pick people up from the most important period in the battle instead of dropping reinforcements off.

Modifié par iAFKinMassEffect3, 04 juillet 2012 - 07:28 .

[Isichar]

im commander shep wrote...

Versus Omnibus wrote...

BrookerT wrote...

just gonna repeat myself here:
"Why didn't Saren Kill Shepard when he held him by the neck? Cool emotional scenes don't have to be logical to be good"

The only one here who seems to be making sense.

Thats called The James Bond Law. The bad guy never kills the hero when he has the chance and in the end pays for it.

Yes even when James Bond is severly outgunned, outnumbered and cornered you know he will end up winning. Obviously he should have been leading the war against the reapers.

[iAFKinMassEffect3]

BrookerT wrote...

Scepsis wrote...

BrookerT wrote...

just gonna repeat myself here:
"Why didn't Saren Kill Shepard when he held him by the neck? Cool emotional scenes don't have to be logical to be good"

/thread

At least a few people look at my posts:crying:

Because he is not a Reaper.

[BrookerT]

Isichar wrote...

im commander shep wrote...

Versus Omnibus wrote...

BrookerT wrote...

just gonna repeat myself here:
"Why didn't Saren Kill Shepard when he held him by the neck? Cool emotional scenes don't have to be logical to be good"

The only one here who seems to be making sense.

Thats called The James Bond Law. The bad guy never kills the hero when he has the chance and in the end pays for it.

Yes even when James Bond is severly outgunned, outnumbered and cornered you know he will end up winning. Obviously he should have been leading the war against the reapers.

erh merrh gerrhd, I would totally by Mass Effect Bond edition

[Fuzzfro]

I'm happy to overlook it knowing my crew gets away.