Aller au contenu

Photo

Was the Ending just Badly Written? - Bad Writing Theory!


  • Veuillez vous connecter pour répondre
212 réponses à ce sujet

#76
comrade gando

comrade gando
  • Members
  • 2 554 messages

Heretic_Hanar wrote...

paxxton wrote...

Heretic_Hanar wrote...

paxxton wrote...

Even if you think IT wasn't planned, it fits nicely into the current ending so why not just call it a day and support IT. The more support IT has, the higher the possibility BioWare implements it in a future game.


How about you stop trying to shove down your opinion as fact and just accept that not everyone likes the IT?

I don't think the IT fits nicely, I would find it weird if it turned out to be true and I actually rather keep the current mediocre endings than going down that IT rabbit hole.

I don't understand why you persist. IT isn't about blind faith in talking rabbits but imposing order to chaos based on different aspects of ME lore.


I don't understand why you don't get it . IT is all about seeing patterns because you want to see patterns It's like seeing a cloud in the shape of  a face. You know the cloud doesn't really have a face, but you see a face anyway because you're human and it's just wat humans do. We humans have the tendency to antropomorphise things and see human characteristics in everything, even if the human characteristics aren't really there.

It's the same with IT. You see connections and clues for IT because you want to see them, even if they aren't really there, you still see them. It is a rabbit hole.


I'm know I'm not crazy, but my crosshairs are wobbling in priority earth, is there a reason for that? IT actually gives a reasonable explanation instead of "bioware was lazy rabble rabble". I'd like to think they weren't lazy and they actually are doing something crazy like this but then I see **** llike tali's face and start second guessing myself.

#77
paxxton

paxxton
  • Members
  • 8 445 messages

Heretic_Hanar wrote...

paxxton wrote...

Heretic_Hanar wrote...

paxxton wrote...

Even if you think IT wasn't planned, it fits nicely into the current ending so why not just call it a day and support IT. The more support IT has, the higher the possibility BioWare implements it in a future game.


How about you stop trying to shove down your opinion as fact and just accept that not everyone likes the IT?

I don't think the IT fits nicely, I would find it weird if it turned out to be true and I actually rather keep the current mediocre endings than going down that IT rabbit hole.

I don't understand why you persist. IT isn't about blind faith in talking rabbits but imposing order to chaos based on different aspects of ME lore.


I don't understand why you don't get it . IT is all about seeing patterns because you want to see patterns It's like seeing a cloud in the shape of  a face. You know the cloud doesn't really have a face, but you see a face anyway because you're human and it's just wat humans do. We humans have the tendency to antropomorphise things and see human characteristics in everything, even if the human characteristics aren't really there.

It's the same with IT. You see connections and clues for IT because you want to see them, even if they aren't really there, you still see them. It is a rabbit hole.

But IT isn't based on wishful thinking without any basis. The most important thing IMO is that the overall structure of the ending scenes is very similar to what is written in the Codex entry on Indoctrination (betraying a friend, trusting an enemy, viewing a Reaper with superstitious awe).

Modifié par paxxton, 17 juillet 2012 - 12:59 .


#78
MegaSovereign

MegaSovereign
  • Members
  • 10 794 messages

paxxton wrote...

Heretic_Hanar wrote...

paxxton wrote...

Heretic_Hanar wrote...

paxxton wrote...

Even if you think IT wasn't planned, it fits nicely into the current ending so why not just call it a day and support IT. The more support IT has, the higher the possibility BioWare implements it in a future game.


How about you stop trying to shove down your opinion as fact and just accept that not everyone likes the IT?

I don't think the IT fits nicely, I would find it weird if it turned out to be true and I actually rather keep the current mediocre endings than going down that IT rabbit hole.

I don't understand why you persist. IT isn't about blind faith in talking rabbits but imposing order to chaos based on different aspects of ME lore.


I don't understand why you don't get it . IT is all about seeing patterns because you want to see patterns It's like seeing a cloud in the shape of  a face. You know the cloud doesn't really have a face, but you see a face anyway because you're human and it's just wat humans do. We humans have the tendency to antropomorphise things and see human characteristics in everything, even if the human characteristics aren't really there.

It's the same with IT. You see connections and clues for IT because you want to see them, even if they aren't really there, you still see them. It is a rabbit hole.

But IT isn't based on wishful thinking without any basis. The most important thing IMO is that the overall structure of the ending scenes is very similar to what is written in the Codex entry on Indoctrination (betraying a friend, trusting an enemy, viewing a Reaper with superstitious awe).


So why does rejecting the Catalyst's options and staying true to your morals result in a Critical Mission Failure?

#79
paxxton

paxxton
  • Members
  • 8 445 messages

MegaSovereign wrote...

paxxton wrote...

Heretic_Hanar wrote...

paxxton wrote...

Heretic_Hanar wrote...

paxxton wrote...

Even if you think IT wasn't planned, it fits nicely into the current ending so why not just call it a day and support IT. The more support IT has, the higher the possibility BioWare implements it in a future game.


How about you stop trying to shove down your opinion as fact and just accept that not everyone likes the IT?

I don't think the IT fits nicely, I would find it weird if it turned out to be true and I actually rather keep the current mediocre endings than going down that IT rabbit hole.

I don't understand why you persist. IT isn't about blind faith in talking rabbits but imposing order to chaos based on different aspects of ME lore.


I don't understand why you don't get it . IT is all about seeing patterns because you want to see patterns It's like seeing a cloud in the shape of  a face. You know the cloud doesn't really have a face, but you see a face anyway because you're human and it's just wat humans do. We humans have the tendency to antropomorphise things and see human characteristics in everything, even if the human characteristics aren't really there.

It's the same with IT. You see connections and clues for IT because you want to see them, even if they aren't really there, you still see them. It is a rabbit hole.

But IT isn't based on wishful thinking without any basis. The most important thing IMO is that the overall structure of the ending scenes is very similar to what is written in the Codex entry on Indoctrination (betraying a friend, trusting an enemy, viewing a Reaper with superstitious awe).


So why does rejecting the Catalyst's options and staying true to your morals result in a Critical Mission Failure?


Maybe because you can't defeat the Reapers. They are simply too powerful. Posted Image + Shepard decides NOT to use the Crucible which even further lowers the chances of winning.

Modifié par paxxton, 17 juillet 2012 - 01:06 .


#80
The Heretic of Time

The Heretic of Time
  • Members
  • 5 612 messages

paxxton wrote...

But IT isn't based on wishful thinking without any basis. The most important thing IMO is that the overall structure of the ending scenes is verysimilar to what is written in the Codex entry on Indoctrination (betraying a friend, trusting an enemy, viewing a Reaper with superstitious awe).


After the EC the IT definitely is wishful thinking. The most important thing is that if BioWare wanted to do something with the IT, they would have done so in the EC. They didn't. Instead they greatly expanded on the original 3 endings, fixed some of the plotholes, added extra dialogue and explanations and tried to give fans more closue. They even added an extra 4th ending for those who wanted to refuse the Catalyst so badly! They didn't do anything with the IT however and to think they will in the future is just wishful thinking.

And no, the ending doesn't clearly fit with the codex at all. You think it does because that's what you want to see. For example I didn't see my Shepard betraying anyone, nor did my Shepard trust the enemy and my Shepard DEFINITELY DID NOT view the reapers with superstitious awe.

And no, don't even start about destroy = betrayal, control = trusting the enemy and synthesis = viewing the Reapers with superstitious awe. That's jus grasping at straws at it's very best.


The first step to accepting the endings are just poorly written is to accept the whole of ME3 was kinda poorly written. In fact, it already started to go downhill with ME2 when you spend 90% of the game fixing the daddy issues of your sqaddies instead of focussing on the upcoming Reaper thread.

IT is just wishful thinking and frankly I don't find the IT that good or genius at all. The IT might fix some plot holes, but at the same time it also pokes a dozen new holes in the plot.

#81
MegaSovereign

MegaSovereign
  • Members
  • 10 794 messages

paxxton wrote...

MegaSovereign wrote...

paxxton wrote...

Heretic_Hanar wrote...

paxxton wrote...

Heretic_Hanar wrote...

paxxton wrote...

Even if you think IT wasn't planned, it fits nicely into the current ending so why not just call it a day and support IT. The more support IT has, the higher the possibility BioWare implements it in a future game.


How about you stop trying to shove down your opinion as fact and just accept that not everyone likes the IT?

I don't think the IT fits nicely, I would find it weird if it turned out to be true and I actually rather keep the current mediocre endings than going down that IT rabbit hole.

I don't understand why you persist. IT isn't about blind faith in talking rabbits but imposing order to chaos based on different aspects of ME lore.


I don't understand why you don't get it . IT is all about seeing patterns because you want to see patterns It's like seeing a cloud in the shape of  a face. You know the cloud doesn't really have a face, but you see a face anyway because you're human and it's just wat humans do. We humans have the tendency to antropomorphise things and see human characteristics in everything, even if the human characteristics aren't really there.

It's the same with IT. You see connections and clues for IT because you want to see them, even if they aren't really there, you still see them. It is a rabbit hole.

But IT isn't based on wishful thinking without any basis. The most important thing IMO is that the overall structure of the ending scenes is very similar to what is written in the Codex entry on Indoctrination (betraying a friend, trusting an enemy, viewing a Reaper with superstitious awe).


So why does rejecting the Catalyst's options and staying true to your morals result in a Critical Mission Failure?


Maybe because you can't defeat the Reapers. They are simply too powerful. Posted Image + Shepard decides NOT to use the Crucible which even further lowers the chances of winning.


Why are you smiling? 

If you break out of the indoctrination attempt, you still ****ing lose? That's a terrible ending. IT is terrible.

#82
comrade gando

comrade gando
  • Members
  • 2 554 messages
yo check this out. you break out of the indoctrination attempt, stand back on your feet. harbinger's trash talking you, shep jumps in to the conduit as harbinger shoots at him, near miss. turns out the conduit is actually takes shepard in to the citadel (the real citadel not this mumbo jumbo craziness we got now), where he must battle through more reapers infesting the city, gets to the control panel to activate the crucible and it turns out all it does is open a black hole that transports harbinger, the citadel and shepard to dark space where they have their ultimate show down in badass mass effect fashion (not this artsy fartsy nonsense). shepard wins, disables the reapers somehow and makes it back in one piece idk, it's a start but it's better than this garbage I got now.

#83
paxxton

paxxton
  • Members
  • 8 445 messages

MegaSovereign wrote...

paxxton wrote...

MegaSovereign wrote...

paxxton wrote...

Heretic_Hanar wrote...

paxxton wrote...

Heretic_Hanar wrote...

paxxton wrote...

Even if you think IT wasn't planned, it fits nicely into the current ending so why not just call it a day and support IT. The more support IT has, the higher the possibility BioWare implements it in a future game.


How about you stop trying to shove down your opinion as fact and just accept that not everyone likes the IT?

I don't think the IT fits nicely, I would find it weird if it turned out to be true and I actually rather keep the current mediocre endings than going down that IT rabbit hole.

I don't understand why you persist. IT isn't about blind faith in talking rabbits but imposing order to chaos based on different aspects of ME lore.


I don't understand why you don't get it . IT is all about seeing patterns because you want to see patterns It's like seeing a cloud in the shape of  a face. You know the cloud doesn't really have a face, but you see a face anyway because you're human and it's just wat humans do. We humans have the tendency to antropomorphise things and see human characteristics in everything, even if the human characteristics aren't really there.

It's the same with IT. You see connections and clues for IT because you want to see them, even if they aren't really there, you still see them. It is a rabbit hole.

But IT isn't based on wishful thinking without any basis. The most important thing IMO is that the overall structure of the ending scenes is very similar to what is written in the Codex entry on Indoctrination (betraying a friend, trusting an enemy, viewing a Reaper with superstitious awe).


So why does rejecting the Catalyst's options and staying true to your morals result in a Critical Mission Failure?


Maybe because you can't defeat the Reapers. They are simply too powerful. Posted Image + Shepard decides NOT to use the Crucible which even further lowers the chances of winning.


Why are you smiling? 

If you break out of the indoctrination attempt, you still ****ing lose? That's a terrible ending. IT is terrible.

I wasn't smiling.
You lose because you can't defeat the Reapers conventionally. You made the wrong choice.

#84
paxxton

paxxton
  • Members
  • 8 445 messages

Heretic_Hanar wrote...

paxxton wrote...

But IT isn't based on wishful thinking without any basis. The most important thing IMO is that the overall structure of the ending scenes is verysimilar to what is written in the Codex entry on Indoctrination (betraying a friend, trusting an enemy, viewing a Reaper with superstitious awe).


After the EC the IT definitely is wishful thinking. The most important thing is that if BioWare wanted to do something with the IT, they would have done so in the EC. They didn't. Instead they greatly expanded on the original 3 endings, fixed some of the plotholes, added extra dialogue and explanations and tried to give fans more closue. They even added an extra 4th ending for those who wanted to refuse the Catalyst so badly! They didn't do anything with the IT however and to think they will in the future is just wishful thinking.

And no, the ending doesn't clearly fit with the codex at all. You think it does because that's what you want to see. For example I didn't see my Shepard betraying anyone, nor did my Shepard trust the enemy and my Shepard DEFINITELY DID NOT view the reapers with superstitious awe.

And no, don't even start about destroy = betrayal, control = trusting the enemy and synthesis = viewing the Reapers with superstitious awe. That's jus grasping at straws at it's very best.


The first step to accepting the endings are just poorly written is to accept the whole of ME3 was kinda poorly written. In fact, it already started to go downhill with ME2 when you spend 90% of the game fixing the daddy issues of your sqaddies instead of focussing on the upcoming Reaper thread.

IT is just wishful thinking and frankly I don't find the IT that good or genius at all. The IT might fix some plot holes, but at the same time it also pokes a dozen new holes in the plot.

ME3 and ME4 are like Matrix 2 and Matrix 3. Posted Image ME3 ended the way it did and the EC couldn't have added anything post-breath scene because it was left for the next game IMO.

#85
The Heretic of Time

The Heretic of Time
  • Members
  • 5 612 messages

MegaSovereign wrote...

If you break out of the indoctrination attempt, you still ****ing lose? That's a terrible ending. IT is terrible.


The IT has double standards. First they say you should not trust the Catalyst and you shouldn't fall for his little game, because he's trying to indoctrinate you. But when you point out that when you do exactly that (rejecting the Catalyst and refusing to play his game), you actually end up with a glorified game-over screen, they go and saying that nooooooo you should use the Crucible, but you shouldn't listen to the Catalyst. Just go for the Destroy ending, because that ending has the wake-up scene.

Logically, if the IT was true, than logically the Refuse ending would be the right decision. But because the Refuse ending does not give you a Shepard breathes scene, the ITers jump through hoops in a futile attempt to explain why the Refuse ending doesn't lead to a breathing Shepard, but Destroy does.


Meanwhile, anyone who takes the endings at face-value, see that the logical reason why Shepard breathes in the Destroy ending (and not in the other endings) is because the Destroy ending is the only ending where Shepard could possibly survive. In Control you get vaporized. In Synthesis you get vaporized. And in Refuse you loose and get destroyed by the Reapers. Only in Destroy do you have a small chance to survive the blast and live another day.

All the Shepard breathing scene does is give hope for those who didn't want their Shepard to die. BioWare didn't want to kill Shepard in EVERY ending because they knew fans would find it hard to let their Shepard go and frankly, BioWare also found it hard. They wanted to give the fans and themselves a beacon of hope that their Shepard might not be death if you chose the Destroy ending, the only ending where Shepard does not vaporize.

#86
MegaSovereign

MegaSovereign
  • Members
  • 10 794 messages

I wasn't smiling.
You lose because you can't defeat the Reapers conventionally. You made the wrong choice.


How does that even play into indoctrination? Why does refusal result in you being indoctrinated?

#87
MegaSovereign

MegaSovereign
  • Members
  • 10 794 messages

Heretic_Hanar wrote...

MegaSovereign wrote...

If you break out of the indoctrination attempt, you still ****ing lose? That's a terrible ending. IT is terrible.


The IT has double standards. First they say you should not trust the Catalyst and you shouldn't fall for his little game, because he's trying to indoctrinate you. But when you point out that when you do exactly that (rejecting the Catalyst and refusing to play his game), you actually end up with a glorified game-over screen, they go and saying that nooooooo you should use the Crucible, but you shouldn't listen to the Catalyst. Just go for the Destroy ending, because that ending has the wake-up scene.

Logically, if the IT was true, than logically the Refuse ending would be the right decision. But because the Refuse ending does not give you a Shepard breathes scene, the ITers jump through hoops in a futile attempt to explain why the Refuse ending doesn't lead to a breathing Shepard, but Destroy does.


Meanwhile, anyone who takes the endings at face-value, see that the logical reason why Shepard breathes in the Destroy ending (and not in the other endings) is because the Destroy ending is the only ending where Shepard could possibly survive. In Control you get vaporized. In Synthesis you get vaporized. And in Refuse you loose and get destroyed by the Reapers. Only in Destroy do you have a small chance to survive the blast and live another day.

All the Shepard breathing scene does is give hope for those who didn't want their Shepard to die. BioWare didn't want to kill Shepard in EVERY ending because they knew fans would find it hard to let their Shepard go and frankly, BioWare also found it hard. They wanted to give the fans and themselves a beacon of hope that their Shepard might not be death if you chose the Destroy ending, the only ending where Shepard does not vaporize.


Thank you for answering my question.

IT really is stupid when all this is in perspective.

#88
The Heretic of Time

The Heretic of Time
  • Members
  • 5 612 messages

paxxton wrote...

ME3 and ME4 are like Matrix 2 and Matrix 3. Posted Image ME3 ended the way it did and the EC couldn't have added anything post-breath scene because it was left for the next game IMO.


Not likely. It would also confuse the hell out of the regular customers who don't visit this forum and who don't know anything about the far-fetched indoctrination theory.

Besides, ME3 is the end of Shepard's story, period. It's what BioWare said several times and they keep saying it: ME3 is the end of Shepard's story, period, the end, finito, fin, eind, ende, end of story.

And before you go "but Buzz Aldrin said...", I want to remind you that just because our friend Buzz says there is going to be one more story about "the shepherd" doesn't mean that it has to take place post-ME3. New potential DLC such as Retake Omega and Leviathan of Dis are also new stories, yet take place before the ending of ME3.

Modifié par Heretic_Hanar, 17 juillet 2012 - 01:30 .


#89
paxxton

paxxton
  • Members
  • 8 445 messages

MegaSovereign wrote...

I wasn't smiling.
You lose because you can't defeat the Reapers conventionally. You made the wrong choice.


How does that even play into indoctrination? Why does refusal result in you being indoctrinated?

Precisely, because the Catalyst's speech persuaded you to abandon the original plan of using the Crucible. Unless you have some serious firepower (Leviathan?), you're doomed.

#90
masster blaster

masster blaster
  • Members
  • 7 278 messages

MegaSovereign wrote...

Heretic_Hanar wrote...

MegaSovereign wrote...

If you break out of the indoctrination attempt, you still ****ing lose? That's a terrible ending. IT is terrible.


The IT has double standards. First they say you should not trust the Catalyst and you shouldn't fall for his little game, because he's trying to indoctrinate you. But when you point out that when you do exactly that (rejecting the Catalyst and refusing to play his game), you actually end up with a glorified game-over screen, they go and saying that nooooooo you should use the Crucible, but you shouldn't listen to the Catalyst. Just go for the Destroy ending, because that ending has the wake-up scene.

Logically, if the IT was true, than logically the Refuse ending would be the right decision. But because the Refuse ending does not give you a Shepard breathes scene, the ITers jump through hoops in a futile attempt to explain why the Refuse ending doesn't lead to a breathing Shepard, but Destroy does.


Meanwhile, anyone who takes the endings at face-value, see that the logical reason why Shepard breathes in the Destroy ending (and not in the other endings) is because the Destroy ending is the only ending where Shepard could possibly survive. In Control you get vaporized. In Synthesis you get vaporized. And in Refuse you loose and get destroyed by the Reapers. Only in Destroy do you have a small chance to survive the blast and live another day.

All the Shepard breathing scene does is give hope for those who didn't want their Shepard to die. BioWare didn't want to kill Shepard in EVERY ending because they knew fans would find it hard to let their Shepard go and frankly, BioWare also found it hard. They wanted to give the fans and themselves a beacon of hope that their Shepard might not be death if you chose the Destroy ending, the only ending where Shepard does not vaporize.


Thank you for answering my question.

IT really is stupid when all this is in perspective.



Or really. i guess you think your better, than saying Mass Effect 3 has a bad ending and writing. Gee i wonder why Bioware does not deni IT, because you are acting like ***holes saying this and that. While we try to specualte like they want us too.

#91
MegaSovereign

MegaSovereign
  • Members
  • 10 794 messages

paxxton wrote...

MegaSovereign wrote...

I wasn't smiling.
You lose because you can't defeat the Reapers conventionally. You made the wrong choice.


How does that even play into indoctrination? Why does refusal result in you being indoctrinated?

Precisely, because the Catalyst's speech persuaded you to abandon the original plan of using the Crucible. Unless you have some serious firepower (Leviathan?), you're doomed.


He didn't persuade me into anything.

Are you being for real? I only win if I trust the Catalyst just the right amount?

Modifié par MegaSovereign, 17 juillet 2012 - 01:32 .


#92
Oxspit

Oxspit
  • Members
  • 75 messages
Speaking as someone who was given an xbox and a copy of ME1 in April, and who has only just finished ME3 (it's been quite a while before this that I was any kind of gamer) .... I really have to reluctantly agree.

I've trotted over to the IT threads and, well, as much as I'd like to believe BW still has something up its sleeve that will make everything OK ... well, put it this way. The argument is either that A) IT or something like it was planned all along, or B) There was just a whole lot of bad writing involved.

The real problem with A) is that even if this interpretation is correct, well, they've actually written that badly. And handled it worse. So you really do have to assume B).

And, like the OP I also find rather strange this suggestion that the writing was just great right up till the last 10 minutes or so. I mean A) they had well and truly written themselves into this hole by the last 10 minutes anyway (IT doesn't fix the ending, it offers a means to have a second go at it) and B) How can one simply ignore the glaring pieces of stupid that had appeared by this point?

Like how the Asari apparently based much of their society and technology on millennia-long study of a working Prothean beacon - which included not just any VI, but the very one over-seeing the crucible project from last cycle, who could detect indoctrination no less - yet they were just as clueless as the rest of us about reapers/cycles. And the whole forced ill-defined super-weapon we suddenly found complete blueprints for at the last minute in the ruins of a civilization so sketchy we apparently knew almost nothing about them at all before now, when we pretty much seem to know everything.

And, as I've said, even assuming something like IT, they still have to write themselves out of a few holes in a manner actually thematically consistent with the rest of the series. Like:

1) What in the hell is the reapers motivation, even in general terms? These beings have been presented to us up until now (well, in the first 2 games, at least) as, like, space cthulus/gods with minds of their own. What possible motivation could be so compelling as to see them, without any apparent internal dissent even, limiting themselves to this strange existence of hibernation interspersed with war and slaughter. I mean... none of them even seem to get a little bored with it, let alone take a philosophical objection. The dark energy thing possibly could have/could do a reasonable job of this, as could simple reproductive necessity or something like it (though I think it'd be quite a stretch), but the synthetics vs organics thing is patently ridiculous, at least as it has been presented to us. A 'they just like it' explanation is much better than that.

2) The human reaper in ME2. What was the point of that? What, exactly does Harbinger mean when he says "we'll find another way" to the collector general? The Arrival DLC made clear that the collectors efforts certainly weren't needed for the reapers to reach the galaxy, or even to expedite their return meaningfully at all (they were actually expecting to arrive well before its completion). In fact, if anything, it looks to me like the human reaper construction was a rather pointless tactical error on their part. Or a diversion for them to pass the time while they made their way to the galaxy (don't you just hate long trips?) Was the second act really just killing time while we waited for the third? Really?

3) Most importantly, the major logistical problem of actually, you know, beating the reapers. Or even just surviving through the cycle. The reapers have almost literally been set up as the irresistible force here, who have managed to pull this off thousands of times before. It's actually fair to say that the only force they even intimate at before the third act that could plausibly stand against them is, well, them. This is a pretty major hole you've got to write your way out of.

I think a skilled enough writer could probably do a decent job of writing their way out of there given the whole of ME3 to work with, but it's pretty damn hard to just change the last 10 minutes and manage it.

#93
paxxton

paxxton
  • Members
  • 8 445 messages

MegaSovereign wrote...

paxxton wrote...

MegaSovereign wrote...

I wasn't smiling.
You lose because you can't defeat the Reapers conventionally. You made the wrong choice.


How does that even play into indoctrination? Why does refusal result in you being indoctrinated?

Precisely, because the Catalyst's speech persuaded you to abandon the original plan of using the Crucible. Unless you have some serious firepower (Leviathan?), you're doomed.


He didn't persuade me into anything.

Are you being for real? I only win if I trust the Catalyst just the right amount?

Yes, I'm very much real the last time I checked. Posted Image
The point is that the choices are real but the consequences aren't.

#94
The Heretic of Time

The Heretic of Time
  • Members
  • 5 612 messages

paxxton wrote...

MegaSovereign wrote...

I wasn't smiling.
You lose because you can't defeat the Reapers conventionally. You made the wrong choice.


How does that even play into indoctrination? Why does refusal result in you being indoctrinated?

Precisely, because the Catalyst's speech persuaded you to abandon the original plan of using the Crucible. Unless you have some serious firepower (Leviathan?), you're doomed.


Oh so now the Catalyst is trying to talk you out of using the Crucible? I thought he was tyring to convince you to use the Crucible for synthesis?

Do you ITers even know what you want or not? So what is it? Does the Catalyst try to talk you out of using the Crucible? Or does he try to convince you to use the Crucible and choose Synthesis? You can't have both and by now you must realize that whatever you answer, you're going to debunk your own little theory.

If you say the Catalyst is trying to talk you out of using the Crucible, then I have to point out that it's not true, because the Catalyst is heavily advertising the Synthesis option. He wants you to pick that.

if you say the Catalyst is trying to talk you into choosing Synthesis, then I have to point out that logically, refusing him and his logic should break the indoctrination, yet it doesn't, you clearly loose if you pick Refuse.


Anyway, this topic is to discuss the bad writing of Mass Effect, not the indoctrination theory. I specifically made this topic so I wouldn't have to bother you ITers anymore in your thread. I would like it if you guys wouldn't bother this thread with your IT either. You're welcome to discuss the quality of the writing in Mass Effect though.

#95
MegaSovereign

MegaSovereign
  • Members
  • 10 794 messages

paxxton wrote...

MegaSovereign wrote...

paxxton wrote...

MegaSovereign wrote...

I wasn't smiling.
You lose because you can't defeat the Reapers conventionally. You made the wrong choice.


How does that even play into indoctrination? Why does refusal result in you being indoctrinated?

Precisely, because the Catalyst's speech persuaded you to abandon the original plan of using the Crucible. Unless you have some serious firepower (Leviathan?), you're doomed.


He didn't persuade me into anything.

Are you being for real? I only win if I trust the Catalyst just the right amount?

Yes, I'm very much real the last time I checked. Posted Image
The point is that the choices are real but the consequences aren't.


I ****ing give up.

Why do you have a Control banner if you believe in the IT?

#96
paxxton

paxxton
  • Members
  • 8 445 messages

Heretic_Hanar wrote...

paxxton wrote...

MegaSovereign wrote...

I wasn't smiling.
You lose because you can't defeat the Reapers conventionally. You made the wrong choice.


How does that even play into indoctrination? Why does refusal result in you being indoctrinated?

Precisely, because the Catalyst's speech persuaded you to abandon the original plan of using the Crucible. Unless you have some serious firepower (Leviathan?), you're doomed.


Oh so now the Catalyst is trying to talk you out of using the Crucible? I thought he was tyring to convince you to use the Crucible for synthesis?

Do you ITers even know what you want or not? So what is it? Does the Catalyst try to talk you out of using the Crucible? Or does he try to convince you to use the Crucible and choose Synthesis? You can't have both and by now you must realize that whatever you answer, you're going to debunk your own little theory.

If you say the Catalyst is trying to talk you out of using the Crucible, then I have to point out that it's not true, because the Catalyst is heavily advertising the Synthesis option. He wants you to pick that.

if you say the Catalyst is trying to talk you into choosing Synthesis, then I have to point out that logically, refusing him and his logic should break the indoctrination, yet it doesn't, you clearly loose if you pick Refuse.


Anyway, this topic is to discuss the bad writing of Mass Effect, not the indoctrination theory. I specifically made this topic so I wouldn't have to bother you ITers anymore in your thread. I would like it if you guys wouldn't bother this thread with your IT either. You're welcome to discuss the quality of the writing in Mass Effect though.

I should have used the word "caused" instead of "persuaded".

#97
paxxton

paxxton
  • Members
  • 8 445 messages

MegaSovereign wrote...

paxxton wrote...

MegaSovereign wrote...

paxxton wrote...

MegaSovereign wrote...

I wasn't smiling.
You lose because you can't defeat the Reapers conventionally. You made the wrong choice.


How does that even play into indoctrination? Why does refusal result in you being indoctrinated?

Precisely, because the Catalyst's speech persuaded you to abandon the original plan of using the Crucible. Unless you have some serious firepower (Leviathan?), you're doomed.


He didn't persuade me into anything.

Are you being for real? I only win if I trust the Catalyst just the right amount?

Yes, I'm very much real the last time I checked. Posted Image
The point is that the choices are real but the consequences aren't.


I ****ing give up.

Why do you have a Control banner if you believe in the IT?

Because I like the Control ending. Posted Image

#98
The Heretic of Time

The Heretic of Time
  • Members
  • 5 612 messages

masster blaster wrote...

Or really. i guess you think your better, than saying Mass Effect 3 has a bad ending and writing. Gee i wonder why Bioware does not deni IT, because you are acting like ***holes saying this and that. While we try to specualte like they want us too.


No, BioWare doesn't deny the IT because right now some of us are under the illusion that BioWare's writers are geniusses for writing such a "genius" plot twist. If BioWare would admit that they never planned on the IT nor did they plan to use it, then we all would have no choice but to accept that the endings just stink and the BioWare writers just aren't that good. BioWare doesn't want that. They rather have you thinking they're geniusses.

#99
masster blaster

masster blaster
  • Members
  • 7 278 messages
Guys I wanted to let you know that byne's back and is on the thread now.

#100
Oxspit

Oxspit
  • Members
  • 75 messages
A simple exercise for those who think the bad writing relates purely to the ending, and that the ball got dropped purely in the last few minutes.

You have carte blanche to re-write the ending - that is, everything from the start of the beam run onwards is yours to play with. Knock yourself out, but write something that ties everything together, works coherently with everything up until that point and, you know, makes sense. And makes everything else make sense too. Answers the questions that need to be answered. That kind of thing.

You don't get to introduce new themes or major plot devices, you only get to work with what you've already been given. If you like, I guess it's fair to use characters/devices Bioware *does* introduce (like the star child reaper god dude) if you really want to. Since a/the major part of the ending is finding out what crucible actually does, you can do what you like with that (although, I guess the crucible isn't a new device so that kind of goes without saying).

But you only get to re-write beam run onwards.

And .... go.