1238 réponses à ce sujet

[Fixers0]

ElSuperGecko wrote...

Take a look above.  I've added suggestions and ideas to the actual subject of this topic.  What have you done, apart from whine about "bad writing" and sneer at people?

I've yet to make personal insult or accusing people of things, i'll just point out the logical conlusion of a literary analysis concerning Mass Effect 3's ending.

[Davik Kang]

Fixers0 wrote...
What i'm saying is irrelvant, facts matters, opinions don't.

You could change your signature to:

"It's bad writing.  All other views are conjecture."

It would save you a lot of time, because you could just make empty posts and you wouldn't have to write anything.

[Fixers0]

Davik Kang wrote...

You could change your signature to:

"It's bad writing.  All other views are conjecture."

It would save you a lot of time, because you could just make empty posts and you wouldn't have to write anything.

Better would be:

"Analysis based on facts trumph speculative scenarios"

Modifié par Fixers0, 30 septembre 2012 - 06:24 .

[The Twilight God]

Fedi.St wrote...

twilight god did well by changing the topic into deception because as I said in other threads is deception not hallucination.

Got tired of people coming here arguing against dream theory. It's like Christopher Nolan having critics go to his facebook page and constant berate him for casting Arnold Schwarzenegger as Mr. Freeze. Maybe if they don't see "indoctrination" the dream theory haters will move on or actaully bother to at least skim over the subject matter before posting vs. assuming they know what the thread is about without even reading the first post.

[spotlessvoid]

Davik Kang wrote...

Fixers0 wrote...
What i'm saying is irrelvant, facts matters, opinions don't.

You could change your signature to:

"It's bad writing.  All other views are conjecture."

It would save you a lot of time, because you could just make empty posts and you wouldn't have to write anything.

zing


The only bad writing I see is your posts. Find a new hobby

[Davik Kang]

Fixers0 wrote...

Better would be:

"Analysis based on facts trumph speculative scenarios"

Sure thing!  Go for it!

To everyone else:

This guy is a virus.  He already turned someone else's thread yesterday into a 15-page cyclical argument.  I strongly advise everyone to simply ignore his posts.  This is not a joke.

[Fixers0]

spotlessvoid wrote...

The only bad writing I see is your posts. Find a new hobby

If you consider contradictions, contrivance and confusion within a narrative to be good writing then I'll have to seriously question your sense of taste about storytelling.

[spotlessvoid]

Fixers0 wrote...

spotlessvoid wrote...

The only bad writing I see is your posts. Find a new hobby

If you consider contradictions, contrivance and confusion within a narrative to be good writing then I'll have to seriously question your sense of taste about storytelling.

And yet you care enough to keep raging on the bsn. Find a game you like and go play

[Fixers0]

spotlessvoid wrote...

And yet you care enough to keep raging on the bsn. Find a game you like and go play

Never said i disliked Mass Effect as a whole.

[spotlessvoid]

Seriously,
You obviously aren't convincing anyone, so why keep at it. We get it. Fixers0 hates the writing in mass effect 3 and has irrefutable proof he's right.

Modifié par spotlessvoid, 30 septembre 2012 - 06:34 .

[Fixers0]

spotlessvoid wrote...

Seriously,
You obviously aren't convincing anyone, so why keep at it. We get it. Fixers0 hates the writing in mass effect 3 and has irrefutable proof he's right.

Glad you finally agree.

[The Twilight God]

ElSuperGecko wrote...

@Twighlight God: Here's a thought.

You state that area where you make the final game decision (Destroy/Control/Synthesis) and the devices used to make the choice (Control prongs/Destroy tube) are actually part of the Citadel, not the Crucible itself. This makes a lot of sense to me... but how did these mechanisms get on the Citadel in the first place?

The Reapers made it.

I considered that the Leviathans  made it via the keepers (control junction does have four handles), but then control makes no sense. Why wouldn't they just take control via a controlled keeper. Could that even work? How does giving the Reapers to a "lesser species" work in their favor?
 
Cerberus didn't know about the Catalyst until sometime after Thessia and Kai Leng did not bring TIM the data until after Sanctuary. That doesn't leave alot of time to get on the Citadel and construct such a large device without actually taking over. The contraption is hardwired into the Citadel and it doesn;t look like a rush job. Even if Cerberus performed the labor, the Reapers are still the ones ultimately responsible for it.

ElSuperGecko wrote...

This is supported of course by the vision you see of TIM using the prongs (which would be technology he had created, and knew how to use).

There is even more support for this idea when you look at your choice in the low EMS endings - if you handed the Collector base over to TIM, Control is your only option. The technology you handed to Cerberus has allowed TIM to improve the "Control" process.

If you Destroyed the Collector base, Destroy is your only option - TIM hasn't had the time or resources to fully implement the Control process, but has managed to install a mechanism which will prevent the Crucible from fulfilling it's purpose.

This probably needs some refinement, but any thoughts on the suggestion?

There is a very practical and logical reason why the endings work the way they do whihc can be determined deductively. 

Addendum: Low EMS Destroy-Only Scenario  Scroll down to the bottom section headed "A Further Analysis of the Low EMS vs. High EMS: The subject of EMS in relation to ending options".

Modifié par The Twilight God, 30 septembre 2012 - 06:43 .

[ElSuperGecko]

The Twilight God wrote...
Cerberus didn't know about the Catalyst until sometime after Thessia and Kai Leng did not bring TIM the data until after Sanctuary. That doesn't leave alot of time to get on the Citadel and construct such a large device without actually taking over. The contraption is hardwired into the Citadel and it doesn;t look like a rush job. Even if Cerberus performed the labor, the Reapers are still the ones ultimately responsible for it.

True enough.

TIM did have the full Crucible data from the Mars Archives however, and whatever information he had gleaned from the Collector Base (or remains thereof).  The device could have been built on the Cerberus Station based on the Crucible data, and transported to the Citadel once TIM got his hands on the Thessia VI and finds out what the Catalyst actually is.

All purely speculation, of course.  And yes, with TIM being indoctrinated it all comes down to the Reapers anyway, whichever way you spin it.

[megamacka]

Oh.... no..... Andersson was not animated into the 10 second ingame run sequence. Oh dear... Lord have mercy upon us.... Save us all from this horrific writing... Surely this proven everyone except from me wrong...

Modifié par megamacka, 30 septembre 2012 - 07:03 .

[The Twilight God]

starlitegirlx wrote...

Not sure on that point or why but since refusal brings out Harbinger and then we're back at square one, I'm going to say that indoctrination cannot happen unless you allow it to happen and refusal is you not allowing it to happen. It dooms the galaxy, but it does not get shepard to become its servant, which it seems was what it wanted back on Virmire as said by saren. Another indoctrinated spectre? Win for the reapers.

On this I have to disagree.

Refuse is very much an indoctrinated ending. Shepard thinking it's his idea, but it is the Reapers. It is a massive betrayal of the galactic community. The reason Harbinger can drop the charade and use his normal voice is because Shepard is mentally broken.

The Twilight God wrote...

Refuse is the ultimate betrayal. Unlike Control and Synthesis where Shepard is made susceptible to reaper influence and is deceived into fulfilling their will. Shepard is so broken that he knowingly condemns his allies to destruction and the Reapers have him convinced it is his idea. Shepard betrays his lover, his friends, his crew, humanity and every species he rallied together to confront the Reapers at Earth. All these beings came together, followed him into hell and he hung them all out to dry. Every sacrifice made, every life given to provide a future for their children - all of it - was rendered null and void by Shepard's act of betrayal.

Refuse is a repsonse to the hate for the endings. Bioware saw that the ending hate was great enough to delude people into thinking destroy was a reaper idea. People didn't want to choose any option. Obviously, they didn't expect this on release, but given the data it made sense to add this indoctrinated ending. And it worked out. It's more popular than Synthesis. LOL!  And the refuse crowd actually thinks getting everyone (including the geth) killed is better than than just the geth dying (even though there is no evidence that they die). The absurdity of it all. LOL @ humans.

[ElSuperGecko]

starlitegirlx wrote...
Destroy really is the only option. There's no context for control or synthesis beyond saren and Illusive man as examples. Yikes! If you think about it, destroy is the only morally sound choice. The other two are greater risks and have shown to corrupt. Saren seemed to mean well when he found out about the reapers. He might have been a bad guy based on Anderson and Wrex's account of him, but at virmire, he firmly believes he's helping the galaxy. Maybe indoctrinated at the time, but somethiing triggered him to get involved and it's clear it was never control. That never even comes up as an option. It's about survival and being useful to them so they don't harvest everyone.

Thoughts anyone?

I like it.  In particular with your paragraph about Control, it's just struck me how unsettling it would be to have Shepard - a human - as sole controller of the reapers.

TIM always puts his plans and schemes forward as being in the best interests of humanity, but what's best for humanity is ot always what's best for the galaxy.  Where would the Turians, the Asari, the Krogan and so forth and so on stand with a human in sole control of the Reaper fleet?  The most overwhelming military force the galaxy has ever seen, controlled entirely by one man.  Would the other races be subjugated?  Suppose one of the races found itself at war with humanity.  How would that pan out?

We've spent three games beeing told there is strength in diversity.  Genetic diversity, racial diversity, technological diversity... and yet Control seems like it could quite easily become a dictatorship, to me.

[Davik Kang]

starlitegirlx wrote...
snip

Very nice.  Great points.  I want to avoid drawing a conclusion that Control/Synthesis or anything else is wrong (I think they're wrong but I don't want to claim that it's a fact, because it isn't).  But it's a great point, regardless of how you think it influences the final decision.

The Twilight God wrote...

On this I have to disagree.

Refuse is very much an indoctrinated ending. Shepard thinking it's his idea, but it is the Reapers. It is a massive betrayal of the galactic community. The reason Harbinger can drop the charade and use his normal voice is because Shepard is mentally broken.
...

Refuse is a repsonse to the hate for the endings. Bioware saw that the ending hate was great enough to delude people into thinking destroy was a reaper idea. People didn't want to choose any option. Obviously, they didn't expect this on release, but given the data it made sense to add this indoctrinated ending. And it worked out. It's more popular than Synthesis. LOL!  And the refuse crowd actually thinks getting everyone (including the geth) killed is better than than just the geth dying (even though there is no evidence that they die). The absurdity of it all. LOL @ humans.

I don't agree with this actually.  I think choosing between Destroy and Refuse is a moral thing.  (In my story Shepard chose Destroy btw, and would do 1000 times over)

I made a post about this somewhere, I'll dig it up if I can.  In short, I think the ReaperChild is genuinely disappointed if you refuse, because you did refuse to follow his suggestions for a new solution.  So indoctrination failed.

If Control and Synthesis are God-complex style choices, Destroy is still closer to that than Refuse.  Personally I think refuse is wrong because, even though Destroy is a terrible, terrible thing to do, letting everybody die just so Shepard can feel self-righteous is even worse.  

But just my opinion!  Not fact.

Modifié par Davik Kang, 30 septembre 2012 - 07:22 .

[megamacka]

starlitegirlx wrote...

snip

You are correct imo. Most people seem to NOT want to actually put some thought into stuff and want everything handed to them like some spoiled brat. Oh look the entire series has involved indoctrination and it has been a HUGE part of the entire series. But there is no narrative telling me EVERRRRRRRYYYYYYYTHIIIIIIIIING, surely I wont use my head and think for myself. I'll just trust in this random reaper AI and everyone whom does not is a bad person QQ.

 Or maybe this is what people expected.

Modifié par megamacka, 30 septembre 2012 - 07:31 .

[The Twilight God]

Fixers0 wrote...

I don't necessarily disagree with your thesis, though i do find it more conjecture then truth, i disgree that you disagree that the endings were poorly written, which there is plenty of evidence off, such as this.

Everything that guy mentions has been addressed and refuted before. It's based on blind assumptions, ignorance of the story events, narrative and lore, blind trust in the Kid and the concept that characters in a story cannot lie or mislead. That poster's lack of critical thinking skills, plot ignorance, gullibility and lack of understanding does not constitute bad wrting. 

[Fixers0]

The Twilight God wrote...


Everything that guy mentions has been addressed and refuted before. It's based on blind assumptions, ignorance of the story events, narrative and lore, blind trust in the Kid and the concept that characters in a story cannot lie or mislead. That poster's lack of critical thinking skills, plot ignorance, gullibility and lack of understanding does not constitute bad wrting. 

Visable contradicton within a narrative aren't blind assumptions.

 Welcome to Fixers' quick analysis to discover signs of bad writing:

Subject: Andersons problamatic Location
Catagory: Contradiction/inconsistancy.

Observed Fact A: Anderson is nowhere to be seen at the Conduit acces in London
Observed Fact B: Anderson claims to have followed Shepard up second after s/he arrives on the citadel


Conclusion: Anderson is clearly not at the conduit base in London though the narrative does claim that he enters the conduit just after Shepard.
 
Result: contradiction within the narrative.

Maybe you should read this for a change.
You've probably never hear of literary Analysis, don't you?

Modifié par Fixers0, 30 septembre 2012 - 08:38 .

[The Twilight God]

starlitegirlx wrote...

To no present a destroy option would automatically trigger disbelief by the one about to destroy them. So they created all three options, two of which suit their purposes or wants and one of which is present and an option but will be belittled and diminished by the starchild.

Why would the Reapers actually make a device that destroys them?

They would no more make a device that destroys them than they would make a deivce to allow anyone to control them.


If the keepers made the devices (and I have considered this myself) do you think they did it off their own will or someone elses, like the Leviathans?

[The Twilight God]

Fixers0 wrote...

What i'm saying is irrelvant, facts matters, opinions don't.

Then why are you still posting your opinions?