435 réponses à ce sujet

[txgoldrush]

EnvyTB075 wrote...

OP is so incredibly wrong on so many levels its not even funny, just sad.

or you are wrong and choose to ignore the fact that you are wrong...

[Henioo]

You seem to be confused about the meaning of "deus ex machina".

The Lazarus Project, though I am not fan of, was just a plot device, a direct solution to one problem. It wasn't a god that came at the end and solved everything. Sure, if Shepard died in the Citadle Tower and got rebuilt in ME2, that's something. But this is introduced early in the game and stays there, it doesn't affect anything other than rebuilding Shepard.

And Vigil could not be foreshadowed or it would ruin the experience. Plus, Vigil also offered no solution to all problems. It gave an explanation as to what is going on, and some codes to take control of the Citadel. He didn't give us a Reaper killing machine that was just lying somewhere for 50 000 years.

these may be weak plot points, but they are not deus ex machinas.

Modifié par Henioo, 14 juillet 2012 - 12:39 .

[EnvyTB075]

txgoldrush wrote...

EnvyTB075 wrote...

OP is so incredibly wrong on so many levels its not even funny, just sad.

or you are wrong and choose to ignore the fact that you are wrong...

Nope.

[Kataphrut94]

It is a bit jarring playing ME1 and hearing Tali first bring up the Reapers in idle conversation. It's just really odd considering we now know them to be the ultimate main baddies of the series and everything.

Also, the Crucible would have been a DEM if there had been no consequences to using it. There were. Building it required some of the galaxy's best scientists and engineers, it's default setting caused significant collateral damage and the mass relays were lost no matter what. Plus you know, united fleets, heavy losses, desperate run to the Citadel transport beam just to be able to use the thing in the first place.

As for Catalyst...yeah, let's not go there.

[txgoldrush]

Henioo wrote...

You seem to be confused about the meaning of "deus ex machina".

The Lazarus Project, though I am not fan of, was just a plot device, a direct solution to one problem. It wasn't a god that came at the end and solved everything. Sure, if Shepard died in the Citadle Tower and got rebuilt in ME2, that's something. But this is introduced early in the game and stays there, it doesn't affect anything other than rebuilding Shepard.

And Vigil could not be foreshadowed or it would ruin the experience. Plus, Vigil also offered no solution to all problems. It gave an explanation as to what is going on, and some codes to take control of the Citadel. He didn't give us a Reaper killing machine that was just lying somewhere for 50 000 years.

these may be weak plot points, but they are not deus ex machinas.

Once again, Deus Ex Machina's do not have to solve the main problem of the story. They can solve any problem, especially when the protagonist is threatened. They can occur at any time.

For example, in Monty Python's: The Life of Brian......Brian in a bibilical setting, is chased by Romans, but falls of a  high tower.....he is then picked up by aliens, and then after those events, lands safely on th e ground. That is a DEM. It doesn't solve the main problem Brian has, but it solves a problem.

[CronoDragoon]

txgoldrush wrote...

Henioo wrote...

You seem to be confused about the meaning of "deus ex machina".

The Lazarus Project, though I am not fan of, was just a plot device, a direct solution to one problem. It wasn't a god that came at the end and solved everything. Sure, if Shepard died in the Citadle Tower and got rebuilt in ME2, that's something. But this is introduced early in the game and stays there, it doesn't affect anything other than rebuilding Shepard.

And Vigil could not be foreshadowed or it would ruin the experience. Plus, Vigil also offered no solution to all problems. It gave an explanation as to what is going on, and some codes to take control of the Citadel. He didn't give us a Reaper killing machine that was just lying somewhere for 50 000 years.

these may be weak plot points, but they are not deus ex machinas.

Once again, Deus Ex Machina's do not have to solve the main problem of the story. They can solve any problem, especially when the protagonist is threatened. They can occur at any time.

For example, in Monty Python's: The Life of Brian......Brian in a bibilical setting, is chased by Romans, but falls of a  high tower.....he is then picked up by aliens, and then after those events, lands safely on th e ground. That is a DEM. It doesn't solve the main problem Brian has, but it solves a problem.

This is not sarcasm but rather a genuine question that I'd be interested in knowing: is your definition that DEM can occur at any time for any problem backed up by any essays or widely accepted literary definition source?

[Zardoc]

You're right, the Catalyst is in fact not a Deus ex Machina. He's a Diabolus ex Machina. You're wrong about the Crucible though. Then again, you're a well known troll, so who cares what you think.

[Hydralysk]

txgoldrush wrote...

The conduit was defined in the plot before then, but NOT the data file that overrides the Citadel controls...that sthe difference.

Once again, the ROLE of the Catalyst WAS DEFINED earlier in the game but finding about WHAT IT IS is a PLOT TWIST . This does not make it a DEM.

The role of that catalyst throughout the game is simply, a thing that makes the crucible work (power source, main mechanism ect), we don't know what it is. The fact that it's revealed in the last 15 minutes to be an AI, that controls the reapers, and tells us that we can use space magic to resolve the main plot in one of 3 ways means that it's a DEM.

It's like if I was in a sports story and the main character mid game says he needs a waterbottle to win. There's a difference between him downing the bottle of water and it giving him the energy to win the game, and him cracking open the bottle just for a genie to fly out grant him the wish of winning the game.

[txgoldrush]

CronoDragoon wrote...

txgoldrush wrote...

Henioo wrote...

You seem to be confused about the meaning of "deus ex machina".

The Lazarus Project, though I am not fan of, was just a plot device, a direct solution to one problem. It wasn't a god that came at the end and solved everything. Sure, if Shepard died in the Citadle Tower and got rebuilt in ME2, that's something. But this is introduced early in the game and stays there, it doesn't affect anything other than rebuilding Shepard.

And Vigil could not be foreshadowed or it would ruin the experience. Plus, Vigil also offered no solution to all problems. It gave an explanation as to what is going on, and some codes to take control of the Citadel. He didn't give us a Reaper killing machine that was just lying somewhere for 50 000 years.

these may be weak plot points, but they are not deus ex machinas.

Once again, Deus Ex Machina's do not have to solve the main problem of the story. They can solve any problem, especially when the protagonist is threatened. They can occur at any time.

For example, in Monty Python's: The Life of Brian......Brian in a bibilical setting, is chased by Romans, but falls of a  high tower.....he is then picked up by aliens, and then after those events, lands safely on th e ground. That is a DEM. It doesn't solve the main problem Brian has, but it solves a problem.

This is not sarcasm but rather a genuine question that I'd be interested in knowing: is your definition that DEM can occur at any time for any problem backed up by any essays or widely accepted literary definition source?

"is a plot device whereby a seemingly unsolvable problem is suddenly and abruptly solved with the contrived and unexpected intervention of some new event, character, ability, or object."

By definition, this does not have to be in the end or the main part of the story. It is just that some of the most famous ones are ones that do solve th emain problem in the end.

My Life of Brian example is not only a example well known, but a parody of the DEM.

whereby a seemingly unsolvable problem - Brian falling to his death

is suddenly and abruptly solved with the contrived and unexpected intervention of some new event, character, ability, or object - falling into an alien ship

[Henioo]

txgoldrush wrote...

Once again, Deus Ex Machina's do not have to solve the main problem of the story. They can solve any problem, especially when the protagonist is threatened. They can occur at any time.

So by your definition any solution that is found suddenly is a deus ex machina? Well, that's just dumb, I must say.

EDIT:

txgoldrush wrote...

"is a plot device
whereby a seemingly unsolvable problem is suddenly and abruptly solved
with the contrived and unexpected intervention of some new event,
character, ability, or object."

Sure, quote wikipedia. That's the best source or reliable information.

Modifié par Henioo, 14 juillet 2012 - 12:51 .

[AsheraII]

If you want to see some REALLY blatant use of Deus Ex Machina, then I suggest you read Battlefield Earth by L. Ron Hubbard (yes, the scientology idiot). You'll guaranteed go WTF at least once every 10 pages out of roughly one thousand pages of mind-melting agony. Deus Ex Machina is what happens when a writer is high or drunk while writing a few chapters on a single evening and finds out the next day that he killed several key characters with no way to keep them alive except for rewriting the whole novel from scratch or...
Deus Ex Machina.

Now, that was a really blatant example of Deus Ex Machina. I can't advice you buying that piece trash that's even too bad to wipe your butt with, but for the discussion going on here: no, the Mass Effect plot never comes even close to Deus Ex Machina.

[txgoldrush]

Zardoc wrote...

You're right, the Catalyst is in fact not a Deus ex Machina. He's a Diabolus ex Machina. You're wrong about the Crucible though. Then again, you're a well known troll, so who cares what you think.

Wrong again....the third dream can foreshadow the fate of Shepard an da couple of characters tell Shep that the galaxy will change forever after this is over.

[jules_vern18]

txgoldrush wrote...

Seriously...the hypocrisy is atrocious. Hell, the Crucible and the Catalyst aren't even DEMs.

However, Vigils Data File in ME1 and the Lazarus Project in ME2 ARE Deus Ex Machinas.

Hell, Tali's evidence is pretty close to one as well for ME1. How convienant she pops up and solves the problem.

Pure textbook definition DEM.

Which the Crucible and the Catalyst doesn't fall into due to them being fleshed out and even foreshadowed.

From Merriam-Webster

Deus Ex Machina: a person or thing (as in fiction or drama) that
appears or is introduced suddenly and unexpectedly and provides a
contrived solution to an apparently insoluble difficulty.

Definition of Contrived:  having an unnatural or false appearance or quality : artificial, labored <a contrived plot>

So, let's go through your examples. 
1.  Vigil's Data.  Given that ME1 was largely about uncovering prothean secrets and that the character motivations are based on prothean data, this story mechanic fails the test of being contrived.  It did not appear "out of left field" per se and fit within the context of the story.  Many of your examples simply list events that weren't foreshadowed - if that were an adequate test, any surprise in any story could be considered Deus Ex Machina.

2.  The Lazarus project did not appear suddenly and unexpectedly to provide a contrived solution to an apparently insoluble difficulty.  It was also not contrived - Lazarus was fully fleshed out as ME2 (and ME3) went on.  Even if it were an example of Deus Ex, it can't be held on the same level as the catalyst as it only provided an explanation for Shepard's survival and did not resolve a central conflict.

3.  Tali's information is an example of serendipity, not Deus Ex Machina.  The reasons behind her information-gathering were plausable and explained in a satisfactory manner (not contrived), as were the reasons that Shep and crew encountered her.  Happy coincidence yes, Deus Ex Machina no.

4.  The catalyst as a character is not provided adequate foreshadowing, nor is he particularly well fleshed-out.  But even if the catalyst himself is not an example of Deus Ex Machina, his technology and ability to shape the entire galaxy in an instant certainly are.

[txgoldrush]

AsheraII wrote...

If you want to see some REALLY blatant use of Deus Ex Machina, then I suggest you read Battlefield Earth by L. Ron Hubbard (yes, the scientology idiot). You'll guaranteed go WTF at least once every 10 pages out of roughly one thousand pages of mind-melting agony. Deus Ex Machina is what happens when a writer is high or drunk while writing a few chapters on a single evening and finds out the next day that he killed several key characters with no way to keep them alive except for rewriting the whole novel from scratch or...
Deus Ex Machina.

Now, that was a really blatant example of Deus Ex Machina. I can't advice you buying that piece trash that's even too bad to wipe your butt with, but for the discussion going on here: no, the Mass Effect plot never comes even close to Deus Ex Machina.

Star Trek is notorious for Deus Ex Machinas....and DS9 "Sacrifice of Angels" is one of the worst examples. Poor Dukat.

[jules_vern18]

txgoldrush wrote...

Zardoc wrote...

You're right, the Catalyst is in fact not a Deus ex Machina. He's a Diabolus ex Machina. You're wrong about the Crucible though. Then again, you're a well known troll, so who cares what you think.

Wrong again....the third dream can foreshadow the fate of Shepard an da couple of characters tell Shep that the galaxy will change forever after this is over.

They state that the galaxy will change forever because it was ravaged by the reapers, not because they believe you will be given magical space-tools to decide the future of all galactic civilization. 

It's like saying that the line, "I have a bad feeling about this" in Star Wars specifically foreshadowed the destruction of Alderaan.

[txgoldrush]

jules_vern18 wrote...

txgoldrush wrote...

Seriously...the hypocrisy is atrocious. Hell, the Crucible and the Catalyst aren't even DEMs.

However, Vigils Data File in ME1 and the Lazarus Project in ME2 ARE Deus Ex Machinas.

Hell, Tali's evidence is pretty close to one as well for ME1. How convienant she pops up and solves the problem.

Pure textbook definition DEM.

Which the Crucible and the Catalyst doesn't fall into due to them being fleshed out and even foreshadowed.

From Merriam-Webster

Deus Ex Machina: a person or thing (as in fiction or drama) that
appears or is introduced suddenly and unexpectedly and provides a
contrived solution to an apparently insoluble difficulty.

Definition of Contrived:  having an unnatural or false appearance or quality : artificial, labored <a contrived plot>

So, let's go through your examples. 
1.  Vigil's Data.  Given that ME1 was largely about uncovering prothean secrets and that the character motivations are based on prothean data, this story mechanic fails the test of being contrived.  It did not appear "out of left field" per se and fit within the context of the story.  Many of your examples simply list events that weren't foreshadowed - if that were an adequate test, any surprise in any story could be considered Deus Ex Machina.

2.  The Lazarus project did not appear suddenly and unexpectedly to provide a contrived solution to an apparently insoluble difficulty.  It was also not contrived - Lazarus was fully fleshed out as ME2 (and ME3) went on.  Even if it were an example of Deus Ex, it can't be held on the same level as the catalyst as it only provided an explanation for Shepard's survival and did not resolve a central conflict.

3.  Tali's information is an example of serendipity, not Deus Ex Machina.  The reasons behind her information-gathering were plausable and explained in a satisfactory manner (not contrived), as were the reasons that Shep and crew encountered her.  Happy coincidence yes, Deus Ex Machina no.

4.  The catalyst as a character is not provided adequate foreshadowing, nor is he particularly well fleshed-out.  But even if the catalyst himself is not an example of Deus Ex Machina, his technology and ability to shape the entire galaxy in an instant certainly are.

1. However, the method of delivery is contrived in that the AI pulls Shepard from the chase and hands it to him. It is not found, and it does come out contrived.

2. No it did, fleshing it out after the DEM doesn't change it a bit. It was a very poorly thought out reset device to boot. Fleshing it out afterward is simply a trick to hide the DEM.

3. Never called this DEM...close but no DEM.

4. However, he was foreshadowed, by Vendetta, when he talks about the Reapers being servants to a master. It was alo a plot twist, so foreshadowing too heavily would ruin it. However, he and his motives were foreshadowed. Nevermind once again, the role is defined.

[Vox Draco]

txgoldrush wrote...
Star Trek is notorious for Deus Ex Machinas....and DS9 "Sacrifice of Angels" is one of the worst examples. Poor Dukat.

"Sacrifice of angels"...hmm...that's the one where DS9 is retaken?

And the wormhole-entities, that are established as living in and controlling the wormhole since the pilot-episode, and whose link to Bajor and the Emmissary is explored throughout many epsiodes príor, and whose special interest in Sisko's well-being is foreshadowed here and resolved very much later..., are shutting down the wormhole and wiping out a fleet within their very own domain to prevent the Dominion from killing Sisko and threatening Bajor? That's that episode, right?

Yeah...that came so much out of nowhere and out of the blue...for someone who hadn't watched the epsiodes prior, I guess...

[CuseGirl]

CronoDragoon wrote...

Gallifreya wrote...

A person relaying information in ME1 does not equal "magical space device that solves everything in one fell swoop." Sorry, but it just doesn't. The Crucible is a DEM. No question.

I don't see how the Crucible is a DEM. I-Win buttons are not automatically DEMs.

The Crucible isn't a DEM, it's a MacGuffin. The Catalyst and the choices (which arise from the CITADEL, not the Crucible) form the DEM.

[Fusiontron]

TrollRoll.exe was initiated I guess.

[ld1449]

I just wanna know how the catalyst was foreshadowed at all. The OP's logic escapes me on that one

[Apple Lantern]

The Lazarus Project is not a Deus Ex Machina, it's an extremely important plot point. The only thing it resolves is Shepard's death, which probably could have not been implemented in the first place.

The Crucible's a DEM because it conviently pops up in a place that people had been researching for years already at exactly the right time. And what is it that they find? A Reaper off-switch. It had no foreshadowing in the slightest. You're going to sit there and say that this isn't a DEM?

[jules_vern18]

txgoldrush wrote...

jules_vern18 wrote...

txgoldrush wrote...

Seriously...the hypocrisy is atrocious. Hell, the Crucible and the Catalyst aren't even DEMs.

However, Vigils Data File in ME1 and the Lazarus Project in ME2 ARE Deus Ex Machinas.

Hell, Tali's evidence is pretty close to one as well for ME1. How convienant she pops up and solves the problem.

Pure textbook definition DEM.

Which the Crucible and the Catalyst doesn't fall into due to them being fleshed out and even foreshadowed.

From Merriam-Webster

Deus Ex Machina: a person or thing (as in fiction or drama) that
appears or is introduced suddenly and unexpectedly and provides a
contrived solution to an apparently insoluble difficulty.

Definition of Contrived:  having an unnatural or false appearance or quality : artificial, labored <a contrived plot>

So, let's go through your examples. 
1.  Vigil's Data.  Given that ME1 was largely about uncovering prothean secrets and that the character motivations are based on prothean data, this story mechanic fails the test of being contrived.  It did not appear "out of left field" per se and fit within the context of the story.  Many of your examples simply list events that weren't foreshadowed - if that were an adequate test, any surprise in any story could be considered Deus Ex Machina.

2.  The Lazarus project did not appear suddenly and unexpectedly to provide a contrived solution to an apparently insoluble difficulty.  It was also not contrived - Lazarus was fully fleshed out as ME2 (and ME3) went on.  Even if it were an example of Deus Ex, it can't be held on the same level as the catalyst as it only provided an explanation for Shepard's survival and did not resolve a central conflict.

3.  Tali's information is an example of serendipity, not Deus Ex Machina.  The reasons behind her information-gathering were plausable and explained in a satisfactory manner (not contrived), as were the reasons that Shep and crew encountered her.  Happy coincidence yes, Deus Ex Machina no.

4.  The catalyst as a character is not provided adequate foreshadowing, nor is he particularly well fleshed-out.  But even if the catalyst himself is not an example of Deus Ex Machina, his technology and ability to shape the entire galaxy in an instant certainly are.

1. However, the method of delivery is contrived in that the AI pulls Shepard from the chase and hands it to him. It is not found, and it does come out contrived.

2. No it did, fleshing it out after the DEM doesn't change it a bit. It was a very poorly thought out reset device to boot. Fleshing it out afterward is simply a trick to hide the DEM.

3. Never called this DEM...close but no DEM.

4. However, he was foreshadowed, by Vendetta, when he talks about the Reapers being servants to a master. It was alo a plot twist, so foreshadowing too heavily would ruin it. However, he and his motives were foreshadowed. Nevermind once again, the role is defined.

Meh, debatable. I would argue that 1. is again an example of serendipity and was structured the way it was for story flow, but that's ok.  As for the "master" of the reapers, yes - he was foreshadowed in a single line of dialogue.  His lore-breaking technology (the implement of the DEM) is both contrived and not foreshadowed whatsoever.

Long story short: if you can tell me how a magical device that can insert computer chips into every person, leaf, honey-badger, etc. in the galaxy via space beam was foreshadowed and not contrived, I'll happily concede that the ending was not DEM.

[txgoldrush]

CuseGirl wrote...

CronoDragoon wrote...

Gallifreya wrote...

A person relaying information in ME1 does not equal "magical space device that solves everything in one fell swoop." Sorry, but it just doesn't. The Crucible is a DEM. No question.

I don't see how the Crucible is a DEM. I-Win buttons are not automatically DEMs.

The Crucible isn't a DEM, it's a MacGuffin. The Catalyst and the choices (which arise from the CITADEL, not the Crucible) form the DEM.

But the established fact is that before this, its established that the Catalyst is key to the Crucible...which makes it by definition, not a DEM.

Is it close? Very. There is no doubt about it, but it misses the definition as well because they did define the Catalyst as key to stopping the Reapers. Its still a MacGuffin.

Hell, a huge fallacy is that Deus Ex Machinas are always bad. They actually aren't, its how they are used. For example, Raiders of the Lost Ark definitely uses one effectively. Its how its set up.

[MegaSovereign]

Shepard dying and coming back to life cheapened death in the Mass Effect universe.

Reminded me of Dragon Ball Z.

[CronoDragoon]

MegaSovereign wrote...

Shepard dying and coming back to life cheapened death in the Mass Effect universe.

Reminded me of Dragon Ball Z.

So....it was totally awesome?