251 réponses à ce sujet

[3DandBeyond]

Taboo-XX wrote...

o Ventus wrote...

3DandBeyond wrote...

I'll take your word for that but that does not really matter.  If it refers to the crucible, the crucible is a MacGuffin, something sought after even for no reason that will solve a problem.  

MacGuffin's do not solve the problem in the plot. They exist solely to drive it forward, but ultimately do nothing.

Example: the briefcase from Pulp Fiction.

Even nerdier example: Rosebud from Citizen Kane.

I actually meant in this case it's supposed to solve the problem, not in general and not that MacGuffins always do this.  They seek the crucible because they think it will solve the problem.

A MacGuffin could be anything that they just want to have.  And no it does not have to solve a problem, they just think the crucible will.

You are absolutely correct and I was wrong.

Modifié par 3DandBeyond, 27 juillet 2012 - 01:50 .

[Smeffects]

3DandBeyond wrote...

Sorry if I took it that way.  I just see many that suggest that-that ME2 was badly done because of what we see in ME3 and to me that makes no sense.  The events of ME2 really set up what should have happened in ME3.  The collector base, the knowledge from all the stuff Shepard downloaded (encrypted Cerberus data), EDI's databanks, and so much more that was just ignored.  I mean they have the Normandy SR2 and EDI at least could say, "hey Alliance, the Collectors were building a human reaper-as it reapers are real."  Or Garrus, or Dr. Chakwas, or uh, anyone and everyone could have said that.  Or they could have shown them Mordin's data from the Collectors that they were Protheans who'd been taken over by someone that they might have to worry about coming along even if not the reapers.

See now we are on the same page. Pretty much what i meant. Mass effect 2 was that middle chapter where the main arc doesent get resolved and things are more about character progression. The events that took place should have still been important to the resolution of the plot. In order to tie in, the collector base destroyed or not, should have been your holy grail for mass effect 3, even if all the data where in the illusive man hands. Part of mass effect 3 was already about cerberus having too much information and fighting its own war, this should also have been more part of the ending.

Basicly they simply remade what they already had at the end of mass effect 2, for some conveience reason, they decided to not make it matter. Reboot the thing and this time the new holy grail was given to shepard and illusive man at the same time again on mars.

It would have been better written if the tech from the collector base or its remains where the key and illusive man had it. It would have still forced shepard and illusive man into an ultimate confrontation (perhaps a more meaningful one even). It would have keept mass effect 2 event as abosutly important to the plot. Oh and chance are no one would of though about a star kid coming from the collector base data, i mean it was all gooey and stuff:sick:.

[Armass81]

Because of what they chose to do in the middle part of the story, in other words mess it up quite badly, they had to choose between breaking the lore(conventional victory) and a last minute contrivance. They chose latter, funny thing is they also managed to break the lore somewhat this way.

Modifié par Armass81, 27 juillet 2012 - 02:00 .

[Smeffects]

Armass81 wrote...

They had to choose between breaking the lore and a last minute contrivance. They chose latter, funny thing is they also managed to break the lore somewhat this way.

They didnt have to do neither as i explained just in the post above you.

[Armass81]

Smeffects wrote...

Armass81 wrote...

They had to choose between breaking the lore and a last minute contrivance. They chose latter, funny thing is they also managed to break the lore somewhat this way.

They didnt have to do neither as i explained just in the post above you.

You mean about the collector base? Thats all fine but what if you go paragon and you destroy it? What would the solution to defeat the reapers be then? Breaking the lore by conventional victory or another convenient weapon found in the 3rd game. Only bad choices left.

Modifié par Armass81, 27 juillet 2012 - 02:02 .

[zambot]

Been said, but worth mentioning again. The Crucible is not a DEM. It was introduced at the beginning of the plot, and the entire game was about uniting the galaxy in order to build and protect it. The Catalyst is the DEM since he magically shows up in Shepard's time of need to tell him/her how to use the crucible to stop the reapers.

There are several ways to remove the Catalyst from the story and thus eliminate the DEM. The simplest way would be to just cut the whole ascension thing from the story and just have Shep activate the crucible from the control panel.

[Armass81]

zambot wrote...

Been said, but worth mentioning again. The Crucible is not a DEM. It was introduced at the beginning of the plot, and the entire game was about uniting the galaxy in order to build and protect it. The Catalyst is the DEM since he magically shows up in Shepard's time of need to tell him/her how to use the crucible to stop the reapers.

There are several ways to remove the Catalyst from the story and thus eliminate the DEM. The simplest way would be to just cut the whole ascension thing from the story and just have Shep activate the crucible from the control panel.

But then the game would only have one ending and people would complain about the game not having different endings.

[Smeffects]

Armass81 wrote...

Smeffects wrote...

Armass81 wrote...

They had to choose between breaking the lore and a last minute contrivance. They chose latter, funny thing is they also managed to break the lore somewhat this way.

They didnt have to do neither as i explained just in the post above you.

You mean about the collector base? Thats all fine but what if you go paragon and you destroy it? What would the solution to defeat the reapers be then? Breaking the lore by conventional victory or another convenient weapon found in the 3rd game.

Even if you destroy it in mass effect 2 , remains of  it are recovered by illusive man. Tough in the actual mass effect 3 game its as meaningful as a pimple on garrus ass for the main plot. Which is the problem. Destroying or not could have made what was found to fight the reaper different in some way. But the essence of it would still be the same, mass effect 2 event didnt have to mean nothing to the main arc. They simply dropped one holy grail from the collector base or its remains, given you and illusive man another one on mars for convenience so you would know the whole plot if you didnt play mass effect 2, woopie?

What im pointing out is that there was already a way in this triology to end the non conventional plot without the use of a deviece that magicly happens in the final chapter. It was already setup. Now theres no point in even trying to argue about how to resolve the star child DEM. There about a million way the holy grail found on the collector base (on mars in the actual game) could have worked, without including a star kid.

Modifié par Smeffects, 27 juillet 2012 - 02:10 .

[zambot]

Armass81 wrote...

zambot wrote...

Been said, but worth mentioning again. The Crucible is not a DEM. It was introduced at the beginning of the plot, and the entire game was about uniting the galaxy in order to build and protect it. The Catalyst is the DEM since he magically shows up in Shepard's time of need to tell him/her how to use the crucible to stop the reapers.

There are several ways to remove the Catalyst from the story and thus eliminate the DEM. The simplest way would be to just cut the whole ascension thing from the story and just have Shep activate the crucible from the control panel.

But then the game would only have one ending and people would complain about the game not having different endings.

I prefer to think the writers could have presented different endings that are the sum of your meaningful choices throughout the series activated by a single button rather than give us 3 buttons to press to get 3 different endings.  

[Armass81]

Smeffects wrote...

Armass81 wrote...

Smeffects wrote...

Armass81 wrote...

They had to choose between breaking the lore and a last minute contrivance. They chose latter, funny thing is they also managed to break the lore somewhat this way.

They didnt have to do neither as i explained just in the post above you.

You mean about the collector base? Thats all fine but what if you go paragon and you destroy it? What would the solution to defeat the reapers be then? Breaking the lore by conventional victory or another convenient weapon found in the 3rd game.

Even if you destroy it in mass effect 2 , remains of  it are recovered by illusive man. Tough in the actual mass effect 3 game its as meaningful as a pimple on garrus ass for the main plot. Which is the problem. Destroying or not could have made what was found to fight the reaper different in some way. But the essence of it would still be the same, mass effect 2 event didnt have to mean nothing to the main arc. They simply dropped one holy grail from the collector base or its remains, given you and illusive man another one on mars for convenience so you would know the whole plot if you didnt play mass effect 2, woopie?

What im pointing out is that there was already a way in this triology to end the non conventional plot without the use of a deviece that magicly happens in the final chapter. It was already setup. Now theres no point in even trying to argue about how to resolve the star child DEM. There about a million way the holy grail found on the collector base (on mars in the actual game) could have worked, without including a star kid.

Yes I think the collector base could have been utilised as some sort of weapon or way to weaken the reapers. I have no idea why they didnt use it, it makes the whole ME2 pretty much pointless side mission.

But they had to pander to new players every single game. This is the result.

Modifié par Armass81, 27 juillet 2012 - 02:27 .

[ElectricZ]

Back in December or so I was hoping that the actual reaper war would be the focus of the game, and that your actions in the game would determine which species survived or got snuffed out based on your decisions. Instead of all of the main missions being directed at some sort of Macguffin (the Crucible) you would have instead been tasked with going around completing missions to build an alliance similar to what we got in part in ME3. (the Tuchanka and Rannoch missions, which I thought were the best parts of the game.)

The game would have started well before the reapers attacked, with a mission countdown timer set kind of like the suicide mission in ME2, and the results of the reaper war being determined by the decisions you made in all three games once the reapers invade.

ElectricZ wrote...

So like a lot of my fellow ME players I've spent some time thinking about how all the choices in ME1 and ME2 will affect ME3. Of course, the writers at Bioware can't account for every choice made, and some choices will have to get a nod by way of email or overheard news story instead of a plot point.

Still, it would be cool if BW makes it so the big choices at least have an outcome of the game. If I were in their shoes, I would make as many of them affect overall outcome as possible. Basically, it would be te Suicide Mission from ME2 on a galactic scale. The choices you make will have a mathmatical outcome on the overall success of your game. When it comes time to rally your forces, you start with the ability to guarantee the safety of one, and only one planet. "Commit all of the fleets to System X," with X containing one of the homeworlds of our friends or Earth.

Then, based on choices made in ME1 or ME2, this number could go up or down, depending on your choices, making it possible to save everyone with multiple paths of assistance. Or conversely, be unable to save even Earth because you made a lot of bad calls early on.

So, here's a list of outcomes from ME1 and ME2 choices I could come up with. I couldn't think of any for some of the species, but that's what these discussion boards are for...

Note that this does not take into account any ME3 choices which would of course also have an effect.

Earth/Humans
Save the Council in ME1: results in cooperation between the Council Fleets and Alliance: Earth is automatically saved, and Alliance forces are free to help elsewhere. (Earth guaranteed saved, +1 saved elsewhere)
Council Dies/Humans give up power: Council forces will help, but earth is not automatically saved. (+1)
Council Dies/Humans assume power: No help coming. Automatic buh-bye, Earth, unless modified below. (+0)
Keep Collector Base (positive result, if the programmers decide) - Tech discovery allows for last minute counterattack by human forces, allowing Earth to be saved, even if Council fleet does not help. (+0) (If Council was saved, this becomes a +1)
Keep Collector Base (negative. Congrats, you namby-pamby paragons. - Everybody gets indoctrinated and Cerberus comes to kill you. Pretty much assured at this point. No effect on reaper war. (0)
Destroy Collector Base (positive) - Will change other species minds about helping if humans control Council. Earth saved. (+0)
Destroy Collector Base (negative) - Humans lack tech edge. If humans don't have help coming somewhere else, requires additional point be used to save. (-1)
Preserve Kasumi's Stolen Memories - Alliance found to have secretly stolen Sovereign wreckage, pisses off other species. They let humanity take it on the chin. (-1)
Destroyed Kasumi's Stolen Memories - Alliance secret safe. (0)

Tuchanka/Krogans
Save Wrex on Virmire in ME1 - The krogan are united under Urdnot and whip the ass of any reaper that sets one tentacle on their already wrecked homeworld. (Automatic save of Tuchanka, +0 otherwise)
Keep the Krogan Genophage Cure in ME2: Tuchanka is saved, united by gratitude to Shepard instead of Urdnot. (+0)
Tuchanka survives, but no cure provided: krogans rebuild, unite and seek revenge against Salarians resulting in long and bloody war. (+0 in reaper war)
Both Wrex/And Cure - Post game, Krograns slowly become trusted members of galactic society. (Tuchanka saved, +1)
Kill Wrex/No cure - Disorganized krogans fall to Reapers without assitance. Tuchanka guaranteed lost without assistance. (-1)

Geth-Quarian
Negotiate peace with Quarians/Geth in ME2: Geth ships support quarian flotilla and combined fleets tie up considerable Reaper resources, automatically saving both, but are not available to help other species. Post game, Geth give Rannoch back to quarians, make peace with rest of galaxy. (+0 otherwise)
Incite War between Geth/Quarians - Casualties high, causing them to be distracted during reaper war and both of them to fall to Reapers without assistance. (potential -2) Quarians battle to stalemate with geth post game, slowly dying in the flotilla.
Rewrite Heretics (positive effect) - Geth use additional resources to defend themselves against reapers, do not require additioinal aid. If war is incited with quarians, quarians are wiped out. (+1 to Reaper War if Shepard sided with Legion)
Rewrite Heretics (negative effect) - Heretics once again side with reapers, causing downfall of "true" geth network. (-1)
Tali Exonorated/Truth about Alarei comes out - Migrant Fleet experiences civil war, breaks up and is easy pickings for Reapers. (-1)
Give Legion to Cerberus/never recruited: Geth remain isolated, never find out about heretic virus, are rewritten by the heretics to follow their lead. Assist the Reapers in full force. Quarians are automatically done for regardless of assistance as geth come looking for payback. (-1)
Side with Tali in omnitool argument - No effect on Reaper War, but post game geth seek revenge on their former masters. (+0)
Side with Legion in omnitool argument - Tali secretly sends back all information gathered about Legion and the geth back to the fleet. (+0 in reaper war) Post-game they finding a weakness in geth security that allows them to wipe them all out. The geth are gone and the quarians re-take Rannoch unopposed.

Palaven/Turians
Paragonned Garrus throughout both ME1, ME2: Garrus becomes highly-respected amongst the members of the Heirarchy military and insists that humans are worth helping regardless of other events. Can cancel out a human-controlled Council penalty. Earth will be saved, counts as (+1) if original Council is still in place.

Thessia/Asari
Lair of the Shadow Broker completed: Liara uses her Shadow Broker resources to grant an automatic save for Thessia. Becomes a (+1) if Shepard was her lover and remained true as she will extend her resources as far as she can to help Shepard. Becomes a (-1) if Shepard breaks her heart.

Sur'Kesh/Salarian
?

Kahje/Drell
?

General:
Rachni Queen spared - Rachni show up in a "here comes the cavalry moment," saving a random homeworld that had not been otherwise saved.

What else can we add?

I think something like that could have worked... No crucible, no catalyst, no deus ex... Just slugging it out with the reapers with the best force available and dealing with the consequences.

[txgoldrush]

Zan51 wrote...

Deus ex Machina is something very specific and belonged to the ancient Greek theater.. To quote from dictionary sources:

"It 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. The machine referred to in the phrase could be either the crane employed in the task, a calque from the Greek "god from the machine" (ἀπὸ μηχανῆς θεός, apò mēkhanḗs theós), or the riser that brought a god up from a trap door. The idea is that the device of said god is entirely artificial or conceived by man."

The Crucible is not a Deus ex Machina as we are introduced to it in the Mars mission. However, the Catalyst in actuality is in that ii is brought in as a being in the last 10 minutes of the game, and it is an avatar of a VI with god-like and utterly artificial powers to solve the problem.

Interestingly we even have Shepard on an elevated platform just as was used for the gods in Greek drama, so the analogy with Deus ex machina here is pretty irrefutable - but still utterly reprehensible story telling!

WRONG

Its subverted, as the relationship is BACKWARDS.

The Catalyst CAN'T solve the problem,its SHEPARD that does. Its the Catalyst with the problem, as he cannot break the cycle without Shepard. Shepard is the "Deus Ex' here.

[3DandBeyond]

I saw it that way too. Not as detailed as you, but basically concepts. Things that need to be done quickly-I actually stupidly thought that was the case at the start of ME3 when I looked and saw all those Priority Missions.

What I saw as outcomes were part due to amassing the assets, keeping them intact, and even making decisions during battles-like even going back to decisions on Virmire--I mean making decisions like those. Getting things the helped to save Kirrahe. Or say telling the Normandy or some asset to go protect another team or asset and risk losing someone on your team.

I saw outcomes that varied as to who lived and died (including Shepard and LI and teammates), the fates of certain planets, and the reapers. So Shepard could live or die and lose his/her LI and still defeat the reapers. Or lose no one and die and lose against the reapers. Just all based on getting or doing things (some more quickly), prior decisions, and even later decisions. Could have been fun as would your idea of assets having actual meaning.

[Zan51]

txgoldrush wrote...

Zan51 wrote...

Deus ex Machina is something very specific and belonged to the ancient Greek theater.. To quote from dictionary sources:

"It 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. The machine referred to in the phrase could be either the crane employed in the task, a calque from the Greek "god from the machine" (ἀπὸ μηχανῆς θεός, apò mēkhanḗs theós), or the riser that brought a god up from a trap door. The idea is that the device of said god is entirely artificial or conceived by man."

The Crucible is not a Deus ex Machina as we are introduced to it in the Mars mission. However, the Catalyst in actuality is in that ii is brought in as a being in the last 10 minutes of the game, and it is an avatar of a VI with god-like and utterly artificial powers to solve the problem.

Interestingly we even have Shepard on an elevated platform just as was used for the gods in Greek drama, so the analogy with Deus ex machina here is pretty irrefutable - but still utterly reprehensible story telling!

WRONG

Its subverted, as the relationship is BACKWARDS.

The Catalyst CAN'T solve the problem,its SHEPARD that does. Its the Catalyst with the problem, as he cannot break the cycle without Shepard. Shepard is the "Deus Ex' here.

How in hell can Shepard be the Deus Ex Machina when to BE one you have to be introduced suddenly at the end? Unless your game doesn't have you playing Shepard all along??

[Mr.House]

Yes. Had Bioware made ME2 focus on preparing for the Reapers, researching, finding tech ect, then yes ME3 could have focused on the war which would have an epic conventional battle, but nope. Bioware decided to waste time in ME2 introducing new characters with no real purpose minus a few, retconning certain things and creating a useless suicide mission that did nothing but hurt the overall arc. Bioware simply wasted time in the middle chapter, which you should never ever ever ever do in a trilogy.

Modifié par Mr.House, 27 juillet 2012 - 03:57 .

[txgoldrush]

Zan51 wrote...

txgoldrush wrote...

Zan51 wrote...

Deus ex Machina is something very specific and belonged to the ancient Greek theater.. To quote from dictionary sources:

"It 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. The machine referred to in the phrase could be either the crane employed in the task, a calque from the Greek "god from the machine" (ἀπὸ μηχανῆς θεός, apò mēkhanḗs theós), or the riser that brought a god up from a trap door. The idea is that the device of said god is entirely artificial or conceived by man."

The Crucible is not a Deus ex Machina as we are introduced to it in the Mars mission. However, the Catalyst in actuality is in that ii is brought in as a being in the last 10 minutes of the game, and it is an avatar of a VI with god-like and utterly artificial powers to solve the problem.

Interestingly we even have Shepard on an elevated platform just as was used for the gods in Greek drama, so the analogy with Deus ex machina here is pretty irrefutable - but still utterly reprehensible story telling!

WRONG

Its subverted, as the relationship is BACKWARDS.

The Catalyst CAN'T solve the problem,its SHEPARD that does. Its the Catalyst with the problem, as he cannot break the cycle without Shepard. Shepard is the "Deus Ex' here.

How in hell can Shepard be the Deus Ex Machina when to BE one you have to be introduced suddenly at the end? Unless your game doesn't have you playing Shepard all along??

From everyone elses POV, Shepard is the "Deus Ex"...he is everyones contrived solution. Everyone looks up to him or her to solve their problems, from the opening conversation between Anderson and Udina in ME1 to the Catalyst in ME3.

However, the actual trope can't occur if the protagonist is the "Deus Ex".

Its quite similiar to the game Deus Ex....while the trope isn't really present in a literary sense, the player is the contrived solution. He is the one to come down and solve everyones problems.

[3DandBeyond]

txgoldrush wrote...

Zan51 wrote...

Deus ex Machina is something very specific and belonged to the ancient Greek theater.. To quote from dictionary sources:

"It 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. The machine referred to in the phrase could be either the crane employed in the task, a calque from the Greek "god from the machine" (ἀπὸ μηχανῆς θεός, apò mēkhanḗs theós), or the riser that brought a god up from a trap door. The idea is that the device of said god is entirely artificial or conceived by man."

The Crucible is not a Deus ex Machina as we are introduced to it in the Mars mission. However, the Catalyst in actuality is in that ii is brought in as a being in the last 10 minutes of the game, and it is an avatar of a VI with god-like and utterly artificial powers to solve the problem.

Interestingly we even have Shepard on an elevated platform just as was used for the gods in Greek drama, so the analogy with Deus ex machina here is pretty irrefutable - but still utterly reprehensible story telling!

WRONG

Its subverted, as the relationship is BACKWARDS.

The Catalyst CAN'T solve the problem,its SHEPARD that does. Its the Catalyst with the problem, as he cannot break the cycle without Shepard. Shepard is the "Deus Ex' here.

The catalyst provides the choices.  Without him or even just his knowledge of them they are meaningless.  And all that the catalyst says is just that, what he says.  He in fact only seems to need Shepard to use his machines.

Any way you parse it, the kid is meant to be the one with the solution.  He even does take ownership of them.  The Deus ex does solve the problem but that doesn't mean he has to work the solution, if you get my meaning.  He is there with the answers.  A DeM merely has to solve the problem.  He does that even if it's just by telling Shepard what the machine does.  As I see it (and of course you can disagree), if Shepard got to the machine and the kid wasn't there, the problem isn't solved.  It's quite true IMO that it isn't anyway even by using the machine, but the writers here are saying the machine which sprouted from where the kid lives has the solutions that Shepard can use after he gets the understanding of them from the kid.

It's like coming upon a godlike being who suddenly appears and says he will save you from hunger by giving you magic to make food.  You use the magic and eat the food but that doesn't make you the DeM because you stopped your hunger.

[3DandBeyond]

txgoldrush wrote...

From everyone elses POV, Shepard is the "Deus Ex"...he is everyones contrived solution. Everyone looks up to him or her to solve their problems, from the opening conversation between Anderson and Udina in ME1 to the Catalyst in ME3.

However, the actual trope can't occur if the protagonist is the "Deus Ex".

Its quite similiar to the game Deus Ex....while the trope isn't really present in a literary sense, the player is the contrived solution. He is the one to come down and solve everyones problems.

I don't think so at all.  Shepard isn't a contrived plot device that drops down to solve the problem and s/he isn't doing that at the end.  Shepard is only using something provided by the kid, either the machine and the crucible or just the knowledge of how to use them and what they do.

In the game Deus ex, the main character is not a DeM at all.  But what is funny and I'd forgotten this Deus ex was an Origins title (you know EA Origins) and at the end there was the machine with 3 choices, Merge, Control, Destroy.  This might really explain a lot.  I mean I knew they borrowed from the DX ending, but I'd forgotten EA owned the title.

Modifié par 3DandBeyond, 27 juillet 2012 - 04:15 .

[Smeffects]

Mr.House wrote...

Yes. Had Bioware made ME2 focus on preparing for the Reapers, researching, finding tech ect, then yes ME3 could have focused on the war which would have an epic conventional battle, but nope. Bioware decided to waste time in ME2 introducing new characters with no real purpose minus a few, retconning certain things and creating a useless suicide mission that did nothing but hurt the overall arc. Bioware simply wasted time in the middle chapter, which you should never ever ever ever do in a trilogy.

You did find tech or at least illusive man did. Its called the collector base or its remain if you destroy it, either way its where cerberus got all its mass effect 3 tech. Instead of making it the pivotal point of mass effect 3, it was simply just cosmetic upgrade for illusive man hideout and 2-3 dialogue lines. The fault is not on ME2, its on ME3 for not keeping the arc going. As they said they made mass effect 3 so a new player wouldnt get lost, but in the process they did a big middle finger to anything else. Harbinger taunt me for hours about genetic and how our galaxy are his labs. Goes to mass effect 3, no word about genetic or anything. Harbinger doesent even have a line. The collector base remains are unimportant to the plot, even the destroyed reaper larva is nothing more then a generator.

Destroying the base or not should have been a pivotal point of how mass effect 3 is resolved. Victory could have been achieved by both, since its cleared pointed out that destroyed or not illusive man did get tech from it.

[txgoldrush]

3DandBeyond wrote...

txgoldrush wrote...

Zan51 wrote...

Deus ex Machina is something very specific and belonged to the ancient Greek theater.. To quote from dictionary sources:

"It 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. The machine referred to in the phrase could be either the crane employed in the task, a calque from the Greek "god from the machine" (ἀπὸ μηχανῆς θεός, apò mēkhanḗs theós), or the riser that brought a god up from a trap door. The idea is that the device of said god is entirely artificial or conceived by man."

The Crucible is not a Deus ex Machina as we are introduced to it in the Mars mission. However, the Catalyst in actuality is in that ii is brought in as a being in the last 10 minutes of the game, and it is an avatar of a VI with god-like and utterly artificial powers to solve the problem.

Interestingly we even have Shepard on an elevated platform just as was used for the gods in Greek drama, so the analogy with Deus ex machina here is pretty irrefutable - but still utterly reprehensible story telling!

WRONG

Its subverted, as the relationship is BACKWARDS.

The Catalyst CAN'T solve the problem,its SHEPARD that does. Its the Catalyst with the problem, as he cannot break the cycle without Shepard. Shepard is the "Deus Ex' here.

The catalyst provides the choices.  Without him or even just his knowledge of them they are meaningless.  And all that the catalyst says is just that, what he says.  He in fact only seems to need Shepard to use his machines.

Any way you parse it, the kid is meant to be the one with the solution.  He even does take ownership of them.  The Deus ex does solve the problem but that doesn't mean he has to work the solution, if you get my meaning.  He is there with the answers.  A DeM merely has to solve the problem.  He does that even if it's just by telling Shepard what the machine does.  As I see it (and of course you can disagree), if Shepard got to the machine and the kid wasn't there, the problem isn't solved.  It's quite true IMO that it isn't anyway even by using the machine, but the writers here are saying the machine which sprouted from where the kid lives has the solutions that Shepard can use after he gets the understanding of them from the kid.

It's like coming upon a godlike being who suddenly appears and says he will save you from hunger by giving you magic to make food.  You use the magic and eat the food but that doesn't make you the DeM because you stopped your hunger.

The Catalyst may "Provide" the choices, but he cannot enact them, thats his problem. He cannot break the cycle without Shepard.

Nevermind that Shepard in fact acted on him by even docking the Crucible.....it is Shepard's intervention that makes the Catalyst be able to provide his "solutions"....which in a sense are more problems.

No, he never takes ownership for them, except for in a sense, synthesis.

Nevermind that the "Catalyst as the Citadel" comes out earlier in the story, which makes the fact that the "Catalyst as the Citadel" allowing the choices as well to not fit the trope.

However, Vigil in ME1 IS a Deus Ex Machina......and the Fifth Fleet in ME1 with Joker is a DEM by way of plot hole.

[AlanC9]

Taboo-XX wrote...

o Ventus wrote...

3DandBeyond wrote...

I'll take your word for that but that does not really matter.  If it refers to the crucible, the crucible is a MacGuffin, something sought after even for no reason that will solve a problem.  

MacGuffin's do not solve the problem in the plot. They exist solely to drive it forward, but ultimately do nothing.

Example: the briefcase from Pulp Fiction.

Even nerdier example: Rosebud from Citizen Kane.

My favorite recent one is the Rabbit's Foot from MI:3 -- mostly for the way they lampshade its MacGuffin-ness in the last scene.

[AlanC9]

txgoldrush wrote...
The Catalyst may "Provide" the choices, but he cannot enact them, thats his problem. He cannot break the cycle without Shepard. 

Nevermind that Shepard in fact acted on him by even docking the Crucible.....it is Shepard's intervention that makes the Catalyst be able to provide his "solutions"....which in a sense are more problems.

No, he never takes ownership for them, except for in a sense, synthesis.

Nevermind that the "Catalyst as the Citadel" comes out earlier in the story, which makes the fact that the "Catalyst as the Citadel" allowing the choices as well to not fit the trope.

However, Vigil in ME1 IS a Deus Ex Machina......and the Fifth Fleet in ME1 with Joker is a DEM by way of plot hole.

The more debate there is on the point, the less sure I am that DeM is a useful concept.

[txgoldrush]

3DandBeyond wrote...

txgoldrush wrote...

From everyone elses POV, Shepard is the "Deus Ex"...he is everyones contrived solution. Everyone looks up to him or her to solve their problems, from the opening conversation between Anderson and Udina in ME1 to the Catalyst in ME3.

However, the actual trope can't occur if the protagonist is the "Deus Ex".

Its quite similiar to the game Deus Ex....while the trope isn't really present in a literary sense, the player is the contrived solution. He is the one to come down and solve everyones problems.

I don't think so at all.  Shepard isn't a contrived plot device that drops down to solve the problem and s/he isn't doing that at the end.  Shepard is only using something provided by the kid, either the machine and the crucible or just the knowledge of how to use them and what they do.

However Shepard provides the kid with the thought that his plan no longer works...nevermind about what I said about the "Catalyst is the Citadel" revelation that comes earlier in th estory.

[Legion of 1337]

zambot wrote...

Been said, but worth mentioning again. The Crucible is not a DEM. It was introduced at the beginning of the plot, and the entire game was about uniting the galaxy in order to build and protect it. The Catalyst is the DEM since he magically shows up in Shepard's time of need to tell him/her how to use the crucible to stop the reapers.

There are several ways to remove the Catalyst from the story and thus eliminate the DEM. The simplest way would be to just cut the whole ascension thing from the story and just have Shep activate the crucible from the control panel.

Indeed. The Catalyst's only real purpose to the plot is to inform Shepard of the various ways the Crucible can be used. This is neccessary since we don't know how it works and there are multiple uses for it.

I suppose they felt the need to give a face to the enemy, though we don't really see "it", just the manipulative hologram it uses.

[Mr.House]

txgoldrush wrote...

However Shepard provides the kid with the thought that his plan no longer works...nevermind about what I said about the "Catalyst is the Citadel" revelation that comes earlier in th estory.

Shepard only makes it there because Starbrat brings her right to him. Starbrat could have left Shepard to die near Anderson and the cycle would have went on.