271 réponses à ce sujet

[Khajiit Jzargo]

Tealjaker94 wrote...

Khajiit Jzargo wrote...

@Tealjaker94
No it shouldn't, the plot of ME changed many times, it majorly changed when Drew left as Lead Writer, and Mac Walters took over.

I'm saying that for it to not be a deus ex machina sort of thing, it would have to be introduced in ME2. It wasn't because they had yet to decide upon an ending resulting in the convenient revelation on Mars.

The Reapers weren't suppose to be defeated by a super-weapon, meaning they could have been defeated in a way conventionally, this is a fact, as said by Drew Karpyshin, if im spelling that right.

[Binary_Helix 1]

Tealjaker94 wrote...

By all rights it should have been introduced in ME2, but I still thought back then we would need some sort of way to turn the tables.

Agreed. ME2 would have been a much better place to introduce a super weapon.

The Crucible should been tied into the main plot. It would have been better than the human reaper twist.

Modifié par Binary_Helix 1, 06 juillet 2012 - 09:35 .

[Casticus]

Khajiit Jzargo wrote...

Tealjaker94 wrote...

Khajiit Jzargo wrote...

@Tealjaker94
No it shouldn't, the plot of ME changed many times, it majorly changed when Drew left as Lead Writer, and Mac Walters took over.

I'm saying that for it to not be a deus ex machina sort of thing, it would have to be introduced in ME2. It wasn't because they had yet to decide upon an ending resulting in the convenient revelation on Mars.

The Reapers weren't suppose to be defeated by a super-weapon, meaning they could have been defeated in a way conventionally, this is a fact, as said by Drew Karpyshin, if im spelling that right.

Maybe the Reapers could be defeated conventionally if they were fighting against the Bigger Reapers.

[Tealjaker94]

Khajiit Jzargo wrote...

Tealjaker94 wrote...

Khajiit Jzargo wrote...

@Tealjaker94
No it shouldn't, the plot of ME changed many times, it majorly changed when Drew left as Lead Writer, and Mac Walters took over.

I'm saying that for it to not be a deus ex machina sort of thing, it would have to be introduced in ME2. It wasn't because they had yet to decide upon an ending resulting in the convenient revelation on Mars.

The Reapers weren't suppose to be defeated by a super-weapon, meaning they could have been defeated in a way conventionally, this is a fact, as said by Drew Karpyshin, if im spelling that right.

Source?

[julio77777]

It's not possible because the lore says so. No matter how much you want it to be. Stop being stubborn about it and accept facts.

[Brovikk Rasputin]

julio77777 wrote...

It's not possible because the lore says so. No matter how much you want it to be. Stop being stubborn about it and accept facts.

This. There really isn't any more to say. If Bioware says it is so, deal with it.

[Binary_Helix 1]

Tealjaker94 wrote...

Binary_Helix 1 wrote...

Casticus wrote...

While the Reapers may have superior numbers, technology, speed, intelligence, limitless resources, indoctrination, harvesting, and the element of surprise, the galaxy has the power of friendship and love. It might be a close battle, but I think that friendship and love trump all.

The reapers didn't have the element of surprise. We also had access to their own tech from the Collector base and Soveriegn's wreckage. Even Soveriegn needed a Geth armada to protect it during the battle of the Citadel.

So the Council and all smaller governments not preparing for the Reapers doesn't give them the element of surprise? The defense council on Earth didn't seem overly ready.

That's one thing that bothered me.

If you made a new council with Anderson or Udina as boss the reapers should have been their primary focus.

I could understand why an alien council would stop caring but putting your friends in charge was suppose to help.

[No_MSG]

julio77777 wrote...

It's not possible because the lore says so. No matter how much you want it to be. Stop being stubborn about it and accept facts.

The lore is inconsistent.  Reaper ground troops are worth nothing on the ground, except in cut scenes.  Had everyone built tunnel networks, everything would be gravy.  

[Binary_Helix 1]

julio77777 wrote...

It's not possible because the lore says so. No matter how much you want it to be. Stop being stubborn about it and accept facts.

LOL

Did the lore ever mention the Star Child? Or did that get pulled out of some writer's ass?

[DirtySHISN0]

Khajiit Jzargo wrote...

DirtySHISN0 wrote...

Khajiit Jzargo wrote...

Like the current one we got wasn't.

You can't say the reapers didn't have a menacing potential until we met them in ME3.

But it wasn't seen as 100% impossible to defeat them unless by the use of super-weapon.

No, i know what you mean. However think back to how just the battle with sovereign was and how improbable the odds of victory were. One reaper taking on the majority of the citadel fleet, unharmed until sabotage from within.

Then in ME2 you find out they have more than brute force, they have been subverting the structure of the galaxy from within the whole time.


Along came the thanix cannon and blah blah blah.

They lost all danger when they showed up. I not saying it wouldn't be nice to have a conventional victory, i attempting to say that we shouldn't be told by hackett it is impossible. We should be shown it. We should be fighting a losing battle all along, not just at thessia. Then after all the percerverance and determination spent gathering fleets and allowing the reapers to take planets in our absence - The final battle.

Then just as we did at the end of ME1 snatching victory from the jaws of defeat. The victorious feeling would be great.

I think what i mean is Conventional victory should be the hardest to achieve in order to retain the danger or threat that the reapers have, this way a victory in that manner would be the most fruitful.

Modifié par DirtySHISN0, 06 juillet 2012 - 09:48 .

[Khajiit Jzargo]

Tealjaker94 wrote...

Khajiit Jzargo wrote...

Tealjaker94 wrote...

Khajiit Jzargo wrote...

@Tealjaker94
No it shouldn't, the plot of ME changed many times, it majorly changed when Drew left as Lead Writer, and Mac Walters took over.

I'm saying that for it to not be a deus ex machina sort of thing, it would have to be introduced in ME2. It wasn't because they had yet to decide upon an ending resulting in the convenient revelation on Mars.

The Reapers weren't suppose to be defeated by a super-weapon, meaning they could have been defeated in a way conventionally, this is a fact, as said by Drew Karpyshin, if im spelling that right.

Source?

http://www.strategyinformer.com/news/17086/mass-effect-writer-drew-karpyshyn-reveals-original-mass-effect-3-endings

It clearly shows you would had been able to defeat the Reapers without the crucible, and IMO the plot was way better

The original choice was between killing the Reapers and trying to find a way to stop the Dark Energy threat with what little time was left before it consumed the galaxy, or, "Sacrifice humanity, allowing them to be horrifically processed in hopes that the end result will justify the means."

[Tealjaker94]

Binary_Helix 1 wrote...

Tealjaker94 wrote...

Binary_Helix 1 wrote...

Casticus wrote...

While the Reapers may have superior numbers, technology, speed, intelligence, limitless resources, indoctrination, harvesting, and the element of surprise, the galaxy has the power of friendship and love. It might be a close battle, but I think that friendship and love trump all.

The reapers didn't have the element of surprise. We also had access to their own tech from the Collector base and Soveriegn's wreckage. Even Soveriegn needed a Geth armada to protect it during the battle of the Citadel.

So the Council and all smaller governments not preparing for the Reapers doesn't give them the element of surprise? The defense council on Earth didn't seem overly ready.

That's one thing that bothered me.

If you made a new council with Anderson or Udina as boss the reapers should have been their primary focus.

I could understand why an alien council would stop caring but putting your friends in charge was suppose to help.

I get Anderson, but Udina my friend? Good one. Still, Anderson is only one man on a four person council. He represents the Systems Alliance who don't believe in the Reapers either. There's only so much he can do, especially after you get killed.

[Khajiit Jzargo]

DirtySHISN0 wrote...

Khajiit Jzargo wrote...

DirtySHISN0 wrote...

Khajiit Jzargo wrote...

Like the current one we got wasn't.

You can't say the reapers didn't have a menacing potential until we met them in ME3.

But it wasn't seen as 100% impossible to defeat them unless by the use of super-weapon.

No, i know what you mean. However think back to how just the battle with sovereign was and how improbable the odds of victory were. One reaper taking on the majority of the citadel fleet, unharmed until sabotage from within.

Then in ME2 you find out they have more than brute force, they have been subverting the structure of the galaxy from within the whole time.


Along came the thanix cannon and blah blah blah.

They lost all danger when they showed up. I not saying it wouldn't be nice to have a conventional victory, i attempting to say that we shouldn't be told by hackett it is impossible. We should be shown it. We should be fighting a losing battle all along, not just at thessia. Then after all the percerverance and determination spent gathering fleets and allowing the reapers to take planets in our absence - The final battle.

Conventional victory should be THE hardest to achieve. Then just as we did at the end of ME1 snatching victory from the jaws of defeat. The victorious feeling would be great.

I think what i mean is Conventional victory should be the hardest to achieve in order to retain the danger or threat that the reapers have, this way a victory in that manner would be the most fruitful.

Fair enough.

[julio77777]

Binary_Helix 1 wrote...

LOL

Did the lore ever mention the Star Child? Or did that get pulled out of some writer's ass?

Doesn't matter, it not about whether you like it or not it's how it is, no amount of denial or nerdrage will change that.

[naes1984]

Brovikk Rasputin wrote...

julio77777 wrote...

It's not possible because the lore says so. No matter how much you want it to be. Stop being stubborn about it and accept facts.

This. There really isn't any more to say. If Bioware says it is so, deal with it.

This is what I'm saying about the writers putting themselves into a corner.
Reapers in force= unstoppable. Okay, that's been established.
But if they actually enter the galaxy and start attacking then there is no conventional way to defeat them. Once again, this is established.
So the solution open to the writers is either: 1 have a superweapon/ deus ex machina OR
2 destroy the Reapers while they hibernate in dark space (it has been established they are vulnerable during this dormancy)
The writers chose option #1. Had I been writing it, I would have chosen option #2. I'm not sure either would have made everyone happy.

[anihilato]

Made some calculations a few days ago as to why a conventional victory is not do-able. Calculations assumed the entire pre-reaper galactic forces united against the reapers, and they still didn't even cut half of them.
social.bioware.com/forum/1/topic/355/index/12950524

Modifié par anihilato, 06 juillet 2012 - 09:48 .

[naes1984]

julio77777 wrote...

Binary_Helix 1 wrote...

LOL

Did the lore ever mention the Star Child? Or did that get pulled out of some writer's ass?

Doesn't matter, it not about whether you like it or not it's how it is, no amount of denial or nerdrage will change that.

Wow. Try not being so snippy. You sound exceptionally hateful.

[Tealjaker94]

Khajiit Jzargo wrote...

Tealjaker94 wrote...

Khajiit Jzargo wrote...

Tealjaker94 wrote...

Khajiit Jzargo wrote...

@Tealjaker94
No it shouldn't, the plot of ME changed many times, it majorly changed when Drew left as Lead Writer, and Mac Walters took over.

I'm saying that for it to not be a deus ex machina sort of thing, it would have to be introduced in ME2. It wasn't because they had yet to decide upon an ending resulting in the convenient revelation on Mars.

The Reapers weren't suppose to be defeated by a super-weapon, meaning they could have been defeated in a way conventionally, this is a fact, as said by Drew Karpyshin, if im spelling that right.

Source?

http://www.strategyinformer.com/news/17086/mass-effect-writer-drew-karpyshyn-reveals-original-mass-effect-3-endings

It clearly shows you would had been able to defeat the Reapers without the crucible, and IMO the plot was way better

The original choice was between killing the Reapers and trying to find a way to stop the Dark Energy threat with what little time was left before it consumed the galaxy, or, "Sacrifice humanity, allowing them to be horrifically processed in hopes that the end result will justify the means."

That doesn't say anything about how we kill the Reapers. From what I've seen in-game, I never got the feeling that even a united galaxy could stand against the Reapers for long. Sovereign kicked our asses. The collector ship, which is just a retro-fit rachni ship, kicked our asses unless we made the Normandy the most advanced ship in citadel space. I never saw how we could win in pitched battle.

[Taco Del Marr]

Prior to ME 3 I thought conventional victory was possible given that the Reaper invasion was delayed, the races had a chance to analyze the remains of Sovereign. And as we learn from Vigil the Reapers invasion plan always starts with capturing the Citadel controlling the relay network and dividing the Galaxy, so I harbored a hope that a united Galaxy could defeat the Reapers, and he tells us they use the Citadel to jump from dark space since they don't want to waste energy and effectively be weakened when they arrive in the Galaxy traveling via FTL

What I would have done differently is lower the total number reapers, add more time in game between ME 2 and ME 3, as well as have the reaper war start about a quarter into the game. Or at the very least have the control option only available to players who preserved the collector base.

[Binary_Helix 1]

Tealjaker94 wrote...

I get Anderson, but Udina my friend? Good one. Still, Anderson is only one man on a four person council. He represents the Systems Alliance who don't believe in the Reapers either. There's only so much he can do, especially after you get killed.

Udina is not a friend yeah but an ally or at least he was.

Both Anderson and Udina recognize that it's up to them and Shepard to prepare the galaxy in the renegade ending.

Modifié par Binary_Helix 1, 06 juillet 2012 - 09:50 .

[DirtySHISN0]

Khajiit Jzargo wrote...

Fair enough.

Spent all that time typing only to think of a more concise answer.


They need to seem immortal, unbeatable to make a conventional victory feel rewarding.
If you could defeat them conventionally at any point point, and everyone knew it, it wouldn't have been interesting to play.

[julio77777]

naes1984 wrote...

Wow. Try not being so snippy. You sound exceptionally hateful.

Do I ? If so I apoligize. As a matter of fact I agree with previous post, I absolutely hate the concept of the Starchild, but it's the lore as intended by bioware and there is nothing I can do about it. All I'm saying is it's no longer gonna change even if it doesn't make sense. So let's just accept things and move on.

Modifié par julio77777, 06 juillet 2012 - 09:52 .

[Khajiit Jzargo]

Tealjaker94 wrote...

Khajiit Jzargo wrote...

Tealjaker94 wrote...

Khajiit Jzargo wrote...

Tealjaker94 wrote...

Khajiit Jzargo wrote...

@Tealjaker94
No it shouldn't, the plot of ME changed many times, it majorly changed when Drew left as Lead Writer, and Mac Walters took over.

I'm saying that for it to not be a deus ex machina sort of thing, it would have to be introduced in ME2. It wasn't because they had yet to decide upon an ending resulting in the convenient revelation on Mars.

The Reapers weren't suppose to be defeated by a super-weapon, meaning they could have been defeated in a way conventionally, this is a fact, as said by Drew Karpyshin, if im spelling that right.

Source?

http://www.strategyinformer.com/news/17086/mass-effect-writer-drew-karpyshyn-reveals-original-mass-effect-3-endings

It clearly shows you would had been able to defeat the Reapers without the crucible, and IMO the plot was way better

The original choice was between killing the Reapers and trying to find a way to stop the Dark Energy threat with what little time was left before it consumed the galaxy, or, "Sacrifice humanity, allowing them to be horrifically processed in hopes that the end result will justify the means."

That doesn't say anything about how we kill the Reapers. From what I've seen in-game, I never got the feeling that even a united galaxy could stand against the Reapers for long. Sovereign kicked our asses. The collector ship, which is just a retro-fit rachni ship, kicked our asses unless we made the Normandy the most advanced ship in citadel space. I never saw how we could win in pitched battle.

You just refuse to understand, the Crucible was written by Mac Walters, their was no indication of a superweapon, the Reapers were suppose to be beaten conventionally, not by a superweapon as confirmed by Drew, if you need more proof, look it up.
And you needed to take it down was Thanix cannons.

Modifié par Khajiit Jzargo, 06 juillet 2012 - 09:52 .

[KotorEffect3]

I hate the idea of beating the reapers conventionaly. It would make them to easy after the entire trilogy built them up as being unbeatable as a force. Yeah individual ones have shown to be killed but always under weird circumstances. I still think the only reason why Sovereign went down was because when his saren avatar was defeated it temporarily "stunned" him long enough for the alliance fleet to take him out. Before that he was tearing the fleet apart.

Modifié par KotorEffect3, 06 juillet 2012 - 09:52 .

[Ieldra]

I have no idea where this obsession with a conventional victory comes from. It should be obvious after the end of ME1 that it is impossible. Really. Very, very obvious. I never expected otherwise, not for a minute.