CronoDragoon wrote...
Without Vigil's data file, you lose Mass Effect 1. Shepard never gains control of the Citadel, and with the arms closed Sovereign succeeds. You did not win Mass Effect 1 conventionally; you won because of a present from the Protheans. Sound familiar?
You know what, I had completely forgotten about the data file. You're right, without that, we don't get access to the Citadel's systems, can't get the arms back open, etc etc. I think the difference here, from my perspective, is one of tone. The datafile, and the Conduit, feel like options of expedience rather than necessity. "I've got this override file, so I might as well use it, but I could always have Tali hack it if necessary" sort of feeling, if that makes sense.
However, you're right, I wasn't even remembering the data file. I just remembered Shep climbing out of the Mako, fighting through to the Council haptic interface and opening the arms.
CronoDragoon wrote...
As for your final (long) point, people are fighting back against the Reapers conventionally because that's all they can do. Just because the Crucible is their only hope doesn't mean that they won't try to protect their homeworld. That doesn't mean they think they can win the war that way. They just have no other choice. Of course, they eventually even have to abandon this to join Shepard's assault on Earth with the Crucible as Garrus tells you.
Initially, you aren't getting military forces for the Crucible. Of course, that's what it turns into. You ask whether or not the player is supposed to believe that without the Crucible getting the military forces is useless. In fact, you are told precisely that. You are imagining an alternate Mass Effect 3 where there was no Crucible, and positing that conventional victory through gaining military forces is the only outcome that makes sense. Which is correct. But as soon as the Crucible was introduced you should have known that it was the key and that without it military force wouldn't cut it.
It then becomes a matter of whether or not you believe that Mass Effect 1 and 2, standing in opposition to 3, established an expectation that 3 did not fulfill. I have argued above why the Sovereign battle cannot be used as an example of conventional warfare working to defeat the Reapers. Did the Normandy destroying the Collector Base in ME2 then establish this expectation? The Normandy is a ridiculously expensive frigate built and upgraded with limitless resources, and it barely managed to destroy a Cruiser vessel. This somehow hints that a similarly upgraded dreadnaught could take down a Reaper solo, even though they are completely different situations?
The expectation established by Mass Effect 1 and 2 that was betrayed by 3 was not one of conventional warfare, but rather the possibility of accomplishing your goal while preserving your morals. That expectation was utterly betrayed.
I'll say this, I can at least see and understand your perspective. I don't necessarily agree with all of it, but I can appreciate where you're coming from.
It is my opinion that the last 10 minutes of ME 3 in particular invalidate ME 2 and much of ME 1 (we still needed to be introduced to the universe and informed there was a threat, after all) due to the method in which it works.
ME 1 and 2 are about gathering information on, preparing for, and delaying the inevitable. We learn about the reapers. We learn their capabilities, how they work, what they're doing, how they're built, etc. We develop new technologies in order to close the gap for when we really do have to fight them and so on. All the things we do in both games are preparation for a shooting war.
And from a metagame perspective, you are absolutely correct in saying that it would be foolish to think that the Crucible is just some giant red herring. They introduced it, so clearly it's going to be important at some point. The invalidation comes in HOW is was important.
The invalidating part of the Crucible is in how it works. It's an off switch. We don't beat the Reapers, we just completely remove them from the equation in one burst of color. There is no challenge, no struggle, they can't even fight back. One moment they're the greatest threat ever, and the next they're nothing. The struggle to get there was pointless, because it didn't matter. From Sovereign's defeat to the discovery of the Crucible plans, Shepard could have been sitting at home watching television and the outcome would have been the same. And the only things that he had to do in 1 were pick up Tali for Spectre status, Liara for Mind Fun, then hit up Ferros for the Thorian and Ilos for Vigil. Nothing else matters.
What I expected the Crucible to do was close the gap, at least to an extent. To do "something" (
) that took them from 'Unstoppable God Machines' to 'Tough but beatable opponents'. Then learning about them means something. Then upgrading our technology means something. Then our unifying against them means something. Then our ability to adapt, while they stick to methods they've been using for millions of years, means something. Then it becomes a fight, and the things we did and the choices we made in the previous games actually contribute to the battle for Earth (and the epilogue voiceover for the rest of the galaxy).
An aside: I wouldn't characterize the battle between the fully upgraded Normandy and the Collector ship as 'barely defeating'. I would characterize is as 'completely dominating'. The Occulus drone did as much damage to the Normandy as the Collector ship, and both were minimal. The only reason the Normandy crashed after the fight is because Joker was too close with the Collector ship blew up.
What I had hoped and expected to see on that front, and what the Codex leads us to expect, is a fleet at least partially upgraded with some or all of this new tech. When the Codex tells us that fighters and frigates now how the power of cruisers, I expect to see it. And I expected to see a similar increase in Dreadnaught capability. I don't expect parity, but we are lead to believe that the technological superiority the Reapers possess is no longer an insurmountable advantage.
Modifié par TK514, 20 juillet 2012 - 03:58 .
Retour en haut
