302 réponses à ce sujet

[wantedman dan]

txgoldrush wrote...

wantedman dan wrote...

txgoldrush wrote...

Oh did I break the whine fest of the haters? And ****** on the past games holy name?

No, you simply posted an incoherent rant laced with ad hominem and inconsistency.

No, I simply countered all the whines and called out the clear flaws of the first two.

Which was rife with incoherence, ad hominem, and inconsistency.

[KotorEffect3]

I like this txgoldrush guy

[Taboo]

txgoldrush wrote...

Cthulhu42 wrote...

txgoldrush wrote...

The ending is fine, you just did not get it.

I got it fine. It was still bad.

If you didn't get that it was a classic Deus Ex Machina subverted....you didn't get it.

If you didn't get that the conflict was about methods, not motives, than you didn't get it.

The first sentence doesn't even...

The Catalyst applies a method we cannot even understand because we are organic. Simple.

But that doesn't make it's introduction in the last ten minutes any more palatable.

[txgoldrush]

wantedman dan wrote...

txgoldrush wrote...

wantedman dan wrote...

txgoldrush wrote...

Oh did I break the whine fest of the haters? And ****** on the past games holy name?

No, you simply posted an incoherent rant laced with ad hominem and inconsistency.

No, I simply countered all the whines and called out the clear flaws of the first two.

Which was rife with incoherence, ad hominem, and inconsistency.

Wrong, hit every point in this thread.

[Bfler]

In my opinion without all the complaints about the ending the game would sink into obscurity.

[xsdob]

Taboo-XX wrote...

txgoldrush wrote...

Cthulhu42 wrote...

txgoldrush wrote...

The ending is fine, you just did not get it.

I got it fine. It was still bad.

If you didn't get that it was a classic Deus Ex Machina subverted....you didn't get it.

If you didn't get that the conflict was about methods, not motives, than you didn't get it.

The first sentence doesn't even...

The Catalyst applies a method we cannot even understand because we are organic. Simple.

But that doesn't make it's introduction in the last ten minutes any more palatable.

The catalyst uses itself as proof, it was designed for ultimate peace and yet its solution ultimatley brought conflict between it's organic creators and itself. It thinks it's perfect, and if perfection could not bring peace, than an imperfect creature like organics or primitive synthetics would never be able to do so, making peace impossible without it's solution.

The flawed logic I can forgive because almost all villians operate on flawed logic, it's simply the reason they are wrong and villians in the first place.

[txgoldrush]

Taboo-XX wrote...

txgoldrush wrote...

Cthulhu42 wrote...

txgoldrush wrote...

The ending is fine, you just did not get it.

I got it fine. It was still bad.

If you didn't get that it was a classic Deus Ex Machina subverted....you didn't get it.

If you didn't get that the conflict was about methods, not motives, than you didn't get it.

The first sentence doesn't even...

The Catalyst applies a method we cannot even understand because we are organic. Simple.

But that doesn't make it's introduction in the last ten minutes any more palatable.

Let me help you "get" it.....

The classic relationship between the protagonist and the God Machine is backwards...Shepards the solution to the Catalyst's problem. Shepard is the Deus Ex here.

"The Catalyst applies a method we cannot even understand because we are organic. Simple."

And Shepard argues this.

[D24O]

txgoldrush wrote...
ME1 - weak character development, plot developments pulled out of thin air such as tali's evidence, the Cipher, and Vigil

Gooby pls

[Olueq]

I hope this is a joke.
ME3 was all around terrible. People complained about planet scanning, so they brought it back and made it worse. People complained about lack of dialogue, so they removed the dialogue wheel and implemented tons of auto dialogue. People complained about the citadel being small, so they made it bigger but removed every other hub planet. People didnt want MP because they knew it would take away from the SP, Bioware did it anyway and its obvious it did. ME3 is garbage. People complained about the plot in ME2, so Bioware made a plot that was just as bad. This is of course, on top of all the lying they did in the advertizing campaign.The ending is horrible, even with the EC (wow, we waited like 4 months for them to add still images and some random 3 second cutscenes). The game is also incredibly short. I beat it in 17 hourse, MP included and got the best ending, compared to taking over 20 hours in ME2 with no MP. Even the MP is retarded. DURR LETS MAKE EVERYTHING THE SAME BUTTON.

Modifié par Olueq, 18 juillet 2012 - 08:09 .

[txgoldrush]

D24O wrote...

txgoldrush wrote...
ME1 - weak character development, plot developments pulled out of thin air such as tali's evidence, the Cipher, and Vigil

Gooby pls

tell me the Cipher on Feros wasn't pulled out of thin air.....

[Taboo]

The solution to the problem stems from hypotheticals.

The Catalyst was programmed to believe he was right. Understandable. But he was also programmed by organics.

He presents a logical fallacy known as an appeal to probability.

Furthermore he appeals to authority. This would not be an issue if he had been taking in information for millions of years. He has not.

Not until Shepard arrives with the Crucible does he consider new options. He has been an information loop since the cycle began.

He is also a proxy. He merely relates what the functions of the Crucible are. He is still very much a God from the Machine.

He isn't lying, but he isn't correct either.

He's just like HAL. Incapable of understanding anything past his programmed parameters.

[D24O]

txgoldrush wrote...

D24O wrote...

txgoldrush wrote...
ME1 - weak character development, plot developments pulled out of thin air such as tali's evidence, the Cipher, and Vigil

Gooby pls

tell me the Cipher on Feros wasn't pulled out of thin air.....

I'm not arguing that, but 3's plot was based on building a giant microphone we pulled out fo the ground the other day but we had no idea what it did, only that it was being built before, many times, and it always failed. So the problem isn't just in the older games.

[wantedman dan]

txgoldrush wrote...

Post EC, this game IS A MASTERPIECE.

And the haters are either ignorant or just didn't get it.

Ad hominem.

The ending is fine, you just did not get it. It was never really about organics vs synthetics.

And not everything has to be explained...ambiguity is okay.

Hell, I think ME1 and ME2 are overrated...they too have problems.

ME1 - weak character development, plot developments pulled out of thin air such as tali's evidence, the Cipher, and Vigil...1) which the data file being a Deus Ex....Matriarch Benezia being worthless (Kai Leng is a far better villian than she is, and he is worthless), 2) side quests do not connect with the main plot and is a plot hole in temselves.

Here's where your inconsistencies begin. 

1) So, you're complaining about a Deus Ex Machina in Mass Effect 1, however you're completely content with allowing the Catalyst to exist?
2) Wait, what part of "Space Opera," travelling the cosmos in exploration, didn't you get? They were like that by design. Do you even understand what a plot hole is?

1) ME2 - weak main plot, opens on a very unnecessary space magicy Deus Ex, 2) comes down to doing errands for everyone to get "loyalty" because they couldn't impliment it in the main plot, 3) the collector abduction is set up in the most contrived idiotic way, 4) post game continuity errors.

1) Incoherent. Do you even understand what a Deus Ex Machina is? Judging by your liberal usage of it, I'd doubt it. Furthermore, you're still complaining about it in other circumstances, yet you're so willing to let the Catalyst slide. Dubious.
2) Another inconsistency. Did you have problems with the abhorrent "fetch quests" in ME3 to gain "loyalty" to your cause?
3) Another inconsistency. Did you have problems with the Mac-Crucible-guffin, which was contrived and idiotic in its own sense?
4) Don't even complain about this after seeing the Synthesis option.

How's that masterpiece treating you, now?

[txgoldrush]

D24O wrote...

txgoldrush wrote...

D24O wrote...

txgoldrush wrote...
ME1 - weak character development, plot developments pulled out of thin air such as tali's evidence, the Cipher, and Vigil

Gooby pls

tell me the Cipher on Feros wasn't pulled out of thin air.....

I'm not arguing that, but 3's plot was based on building a giant microphone we pulled out fo the ground the other day but we had no idea what it did, only that it was being built before, many times, and it always failed. So the problem isn't just in the older games.

Thats not the fact...the fact is that the older games have this problem too.

[wantedman dan]

txgoldrush wrote...

Thats not the fact...the fact is that the older games have this problem too.

So, by your logic, they are masterpieces as well.

[txgoldrush]

wantedman dan wrote...

txgoldrush wrote...

Post EC, this game IS A MASTERPIECE.

And the haters are either ignorant or just didn't get it.

Ad hominem.

The ending is fine, you just did not get it. It was never really about organics vs synthetics.

And not everything has to be explained...ambiguity is okay.

Hell, I think ME1 and ME2 are overrated...they too have problems.

ME1 - weak character development, plot developments pulled out of thin air such as tali's evidence, the Cipher, and Vigil...1) which the data file being a Deus Ex....Matriarch Benezia being worthless (Kai Leng is a far better villian than she is, and he is worthless), 2) side quests do not connect with the main plot and is a plot hole in temselves.

Here's where your inconsistencies begin. 

1) So, you're complaining about a Deus Ex Machina in Mass Effect 1, however you're completely content with allowing the Catalyst to exist?
2) Wait, what part of "Space Opera," travelling the cosmos in exploration, didn't you get? They were like that by design. Do you even understand what a plot hole is?

1) ME2 - weak main plot, opens on a very unnecessary space magicy Deus Ex, 2) comes down to doing errands for everyone to get "loyalty" because they couldn't impliment it in the main plot, 3) the collector abduction is set up in the most contrived idiotic way, 4) post game continuity errors.

1) Incoherent. Do you even understand what a Deus Ex Machina is? Judging by your liberal usage of it, I'd doubt it. Furthermore, you're still complaining about it in other circumstances, yet you're so willing to let the Catalyst slide. Dubious.
2) Another inconsistency. Did you have problems with the abhorrent "fetch quests" in ME3 to gain "loyalty" to your cause?
3) Another inconsistency. Did you have problems with the Mac-Crucible-guffin, which was contrived and idiotic in its own sense?
4) Don't even complain about this after seeing the Synthesis option.

How's that masterpiece treating you, now?

1) Did you know that DEM does not have to come at the ending, it can come anywhere? Nevermind I called the Catalyst a subversion of the DEM, because he too needs Shepard.
2) Wrong, ME3's side quests weren't the main focus of the game, unlike ME2. You do not even have to do most of them to get the best ending.
3) Only idiotic according to you....the MacGuffin shows that other cycles fought the Reapers before and their fight gives the next cycle a chance.
4) And what post ending contuinity problems is this?

[felipejiraya]

Good for you OP.

[txgoldrush]

wantedman dan wrote...

txgoldrush wrote...

Thats not the fact...the fact is that the older games have this problem too.

So, by your logic, they are masterpieces as well.

However, they ar emuch worse......ME3 doesn't lack character development like ME1, and its far more focused than ME2.

[Taboo]

Breaking News.

There is no "best ending".

No, not even Synthesis.

You decide which is best.

[KotorEffect3]

Taboo-XX wrote...

Breaking News.

There is no "best ending".

No, not even Synthesis.

You decide which is best.

Agreed, with the exception of refusal.  Choosing refusal is just downright stupid.

[txgoldrush]

Taboo-XX wrote...

Breaking News.

There is no "best ending".

No, not even Synthesis.

You decide which is best.

The Control and Synthesis choices proof that the conflicts are about Methods, not Motives.

[Taboo]

txgoldrush wrote...

Taboo-XX wrote...

Breaking News.

There is no "best ending".

No, not even Synthesis.

You decide which is best.

The Control and Synthesis choices proof that the conflicts are about Methods, not Motives.

If you'd like to look at it that way that's fine.

Not every chooses Destroy because we want vengenance.

Shocking I know.

[phat0817]

Nope it went from bad to average game is all...

[wantedman dan]

txgoldrush wrote...

1) Did you know that DEM does not have to come at the ending, it can come anywhere? Nevermind I called the Catalyst a subversion of the DEM, because he too needs Shepard.

The Catalyst is introduced suddenly and unexpectedly and provides a contrived solution to an apparently insoluble difficulty.

2) Wrong, ME3's side quests weren't the main focus of the game, unlike ME2. You do not even have to do most of them to get the best ending.

Yes, they were. I guess you didn't do too well collecting that EMS, did you?

3) Only idiotic according to you....the MacGuffin shows that other cycles fought the Reapers before and their fight gives the next cycle a chance.

The MacCrucible serves as the impetus for the plot and was introduced in a completely contrived manner. The way it was introduced was idiotic--five minutes in and Liara suddenly stumbles upon this, despite the library being deciphered for 30 years?

4) And what post ending contuinity problems is this?

Holding hands with Harbinger.