1214 réponses à ce sujet

[LiarasShield]

Seival wrote...

LiarasShield wrote...

Heres my issues with all the endings


In pretty much every ending the reapers live


In Control we have a new catalyst that may continue the cycle or cause the reapers to destroy organics again in the future

Synthesis forces everybody to be part synthetic or organic against their will and suggests that everybody has to be the same or think the same for peace to even exist

Even in destroy we don't really beat the reapers the catalyst talks about the peace won't last and that the reapers and synthetics will be rebuilt by future generations

And it doesn't matter if you have a bunch dead reapers or reaper tech everywhere without the reapers knowledge of how to rebuild the relays they still can't rebuilds the relays in the destroy ending you can't rebuild something if you don't have the knowledge to build it in the first place.

Otherwise you may cause more destruction then you would want

Did you expect that the final choice of The Trilogy will be easy?

...That's silly. No offence

Basiclly your reply was you can't handle being a villian or monster am I right?

Well playing me2 and reading the interviews pre release of me3 I thought our actions and hardwork would actually effect the ending even if we had lost half of our fleets that we would be able to have shepard live if we tried hard enough and be able to rebuild the galactic community to have a victory ending similar to mass effect 1 or 2

Sorry that my expectations from the previous games couldn't have been kept in this one


Also Basicly what is the point of this thread their isn't that much hope unless they add ending dlc because you have to speculate and headcannon almost everything still in these endings

Glad you feel satisfied but me2 and me1 will always remain better then the end which is a shame because I always thought shepards story could end on a good note espically for a hero who inspired the entire galaxy not end as a tragic hero since most of the me games were not pure tradgety but about human triumph

Modifié par LiarasShield, 10 août 2012 - 02:01 .

[Seival]

LiarasShield wrote...

Seival wrote...

LiarasShield wrote...

Heres my issues with all the endings


In pretty much every ending the reapers live


In Control we have a new catalyst that may continue the cycle or cause the reapers to destroy organics again in the future

Synthesis forces everybody to be part synthetic or organic against their will and suggests that everybody has to be the same or think the same for peace to even exist

Even in destroy we don't really beat the reapers the catalyst talks about the peace won't last and that the reapers and synthetics will be rebuilt by future generations

And it doesn't matter if you have a bunch dead reapers or reaper tech everywhere without the reapers knowledge of how to rebuild the relays they still can't rebuilds the relays in the destroy ending you can't rebuild something if you don't have the knowledge to build it in the first place.

Otherwise you may cause more destruction then you would want

Did you expect that the final choice of The Trilogy will be easy?

...That's silly. No offence

Basiclly your reply was you can't handle being a villian or monster am I right?

Well playing me2 and reading the interviews pre release of me3 I thought our actions and hardwork would actually effect the ending even if we had lost half of our fleets that we would be able to have shepard live if we tried hard enough and be able to rebuild the galactic community to have a victory ending similar to mass effect 1 or 2

Sorry that my expectations from the previous games couldn't have been kept in this one

Basically, I think that everything depends on your own Shepard (especially in case of Control) and on how well Galactic Civilization learned the lesson. If you think that everything will be ok after some particular ending, then it will be ok.

...In other words, I think you should try to accept the endings as they are, and choose the one you like the most.

[LiarasShield]

Seival wrote...

LiarasShield wrote...

Seival wrote...

LiarasShield wrote...

Heres my issues with all the endings


In pretty much every ending the reapers live


In Control we have a new catalyst that may continue the cycle or cause the reapers to destroy organics again in the future

Synthesis forces everybody to be part synthetic or organic against their will and suggests that everybody has to be the same or think the same for peace to even exist

Even in destroy we don't really beat the reapers the catalyst talks about the peace won't last and that the reapers and synthetics will be rebuilt by future generations

And it doesn't matter if you have a bunch dead reapers or reaper tech everywhere without the reapers knowledge of how to rebuild the relays they still can't rebuilds the relays in the destroy ending you can't rebuild something if you don't have the knowledge to build it in the first place.

Otherwise you may cause more destruction then you would want

Did you expect that the final choice of The Trilogy will be easy?

...That's silly. No offence

Basiclly your reply was you can't handle being a villian or monster am I right?

Well playing me2 and reading the interviews pre release of me3 I thought our actions and hardwork would actually effect the ending even if we had lost half of our fleets that we would be able to have shepard live if we tried hard enough and be able to rebuild the galactic community to have a victory ending similar to mass effect 1 or 2

Sorry that my expectations from the previous games couldn't have been kept in this one

Basically, I think that everything depends on your own Shepard (especially in case of Control) and on how well Galactic Civilization learned the lesson. If you think that everything will be ok after some particular ending, then it will be ok.

...In other words, I think you should try to accept the endings as they are, and choose the one you like the most.

I was already mislead by the interviews before this games release I shouldn't have to speculate or headcannon wether we beat THE DAMN ENEMY OR WETHER SHEPARD LIVES OR CAN REBUILD THE COMMUNITY

In me1 and me2 we didn't have to speculate about defeating our foe or about helping the citadel or the other races as a whole

Simple fact is even for a cliff hanger this game pushes it too far I mean in god of war or halo or many other games that have much smaller cliff hangers at least you know they accomplished their goals or they do actually live here in this not so much

Modifié par LiarasShield, 10 août 2012 - 02:06 .

[Pitznik]

LiarasShield wrote...

Heres my issues with all the endings


In pretty much every ending the reapers live


In Control we have a new catalyst that may continue the cycle or cause the reapers to destroy organics again in the future

Synthesis forces everybody to be part synthetic or organic against their will and suggests that everybody has to be the same or think the same for peace to even exist

Even in destroy we don't really beat the reapers the catalyst talks about the peace won't last and that the reapers and synthetics will be rebuilt by future generations

And it doesn't matter if you have a bunch dead reapers or reaper tech everywhere without the reapers knowledge of how to rebuild the relays they still can't rebuilds the relays in the destroy ending you can't rebuild something if you don't have the knowledge to build it in the first place.

Otherwise you may cause more destruction then you would want

How do Reapers live in destroy? They are dead. And peace never lasts, I'm surprised you expected something else.

Fixing something is usually much easier that building it, btw. Think about a car.

[LiarasShield]

Pitznik wrote...

LiarasShield wrote...

Heres my issues with all the endings


In pretty much every ending the reapers live


In Control we have a new catalyst that may continue the cycle or cause the reapers to destroy organics again in the future

Synthesis forces everybody to be part synthetic or organic against their will and suggests that everybody has to be the same or think the same for peace to even exist

Even in destroy we don't really beat the reapers the catalyst talks about the peace won't last and that the reapers and synthetics will be rebuilt by future generations

And it doesn't matter if you have a bunch dead reapers or reaper tech everywhere without the reapers knowledge of how to rebuild the relays they still can't rebuilds the relays in the destroy ending you can't rebuild something if you don't have the knowledge to build it in the first place.

Otherwise you may cause more destruction then you would want

How do Reapers live in destroy? They are dead. And peace never lasts, I'm surprised you expected something else.

Fixing something is usually much easier that building it, btw. Think about a car.

Still without the reapers knowledge on how to build or rebuild the relays they still can't rebuild them in destroy

And the catalyst says the reapers and synthetics will come back in the next generation basiclly if you hate refuse destroy is no better because the reapers come back to destroy the next generation lol

[DirtyPhoenix]

LiarasShield wrote...
I was already mislead by the interviews before this games release I shouldn't have to speculate or headcannon wether we beat THE DAMN ENEMY OR WETHER SHEPARD LIVES OR CAN REBUILD THE COMMUNITY

In me1 and me2 we didn't have to speculate about defeating our foe or about helping the citadel or the other races as a whole

Simple fact is even for a cliff hanger this game pushes it too far I mean in god of war or halo or many other games that have much smaller cliff hangers at least you know they accomplished their goals or they do actually live here in this not so much

Well we know we defeated the enemy, the community rebuildes, and the fate of Shepard is clear in two of three victory endings, but leaving Destroy-Shepard like that is cruel. You are right, too much is left to headcanoning.

I like the endings in spirit, but they are poorly executed. If it was upto me I'd have done things differently.

[LiarasShield]

pirate1802 wrote...

LiarasShield wrote...
I was already mislead by the interviews before this games release I shouldn't have to speculate or headcannon wether we beat THE DAMN ENEMY OR WETHER SHEPARD LIVES OR CAN REBUILD THE COMMUNITY

In me1 and me2 we didn't have to speculate about defeating our foe or about helping the citadel or the other races as a whole

Simple fact is even for a cliff hanger this game pushes it too far I mean in god of war or halo or many other games that have much smaller cliff hangers at least you know they accomplished their goals or they do actually live here in this not so much

Well we know we defeated the enemy, the community rebuildes, and the fate of Shepard is clear in two of three victory endings, but leaving Destroy-Shepard like that is cruel. You are right, too much is left to headcanoning.

I like the endings in spirit, but they are poorly executed. If it was upto me I'd have done things differently.

Thank you for understanding

[DirtyPhoenix]

LiarasShield wrote...

Thank you for understanding

Benefits of Synthesis!

[LiarasShield]

pirate1802 wrote...

LiarasShield wrote...

Thank you for understanding

Benefits of Synthesis!

Well please don't bring up synthesis I may end up trying to get a poster of the star child to stab lol

[DirtyPhoenix]

LiarasShield wrote...

pirate1802 wrote...

LiarasShield wrote...

Thank you for understanding

Benefits of Synthesis!

Well please don't bring up synthesis I may end up trying to get a poster of the star child to stab lol

You should probably do that.

[Pitznik]

LiarasShield wrote...

And the catalyst says the reapers and synthetics will come back in the next generation basiclly if you hate refuse destroy is no better because the reapers come back to destroy the next generation lol

He doesn't say Reapers will be back, but that synthetics will be back. So what? They can be peaceful, if not, they can be defeated. There will be more wars in the future, doesn't make winning one pointless. We never really wanted to fix the world, or anything stupid like this, just to defeat the Reapers, save the galaxy from the immediate danger, not from all the dangers that can ever happen.

[LiarasShield]

Pitznik wrote...

LiarasShield wrote...

And the catalyst says the reapers and synthetics will come back in the next generation basiclly if you hate refuse destroy is no better because the reapers come back to destroy the next generation lol

He doesn't say Reapers will be back, but that synthetics will be back. So what? They can be peaceful, if not, they can be defeated. There will be more wars in the future, doesn't make winning one pointless. We never really wanted to fix the world, or anything stupid like this, just to defeat the Reapers, save the galaxy from the immediate danger, not from all the dangers that can ever happen.

Basiclly let the reapers come back to destroy then next generation it is no longer our problem right we beat them in our time so let the next generation figure it out unfortunately I'm not like that the future is just as important as the present and yes my whole goal was to ultimately end the reaper threat so that the future generations wouldn't have to worry about it

[Jassu1979]

So... for constructive criticism: how exactly *do* you supporters manage to ignore the plot holes (or the NEW plot holes intended to fix the previous ones as per the EC)? How do you manage to embrace the notion of introducing a new character in the final scene, and then having that character retroactively change the very nature of your enemy and your entire mission?

Is it all just a case of elective blindness, or is it more like: "Yeah, there are flaws, but I don't mind them."

[Pitznik]

LiarasShield wrote...

Basiclly let the reapers come back to destroy then next generation it is no longer our problem right we beat them in our time so let the next generation figure it out unfortunately I'm not like that the future is just as important as the present and yes my whole goal was to ultimately end the reaper threat so that the future generations wouldn't have to worry about it

Reapers won't come back, they are dead. DEAD. Reaper threat has ended, once and for all. The kid predicts that problem with SYNTHETIC LIFE will reappear, not with REAPERS. But who is to say that he is right, in fact given the data we have it is rather unlikely.

And yes, next generations will have to fix their problems on their own, that's how the world works. There is no way for you to prevent someone in the future to build a synthetic and then abuse it so it will rebel, just like you can't prevent him from beating his wife.

[Mazebook]

Jassu1979 wrote...

So... for constructive criticism: how exactly *do* you supporters manage to ignore the plot holes (or the NEW plot holes intended to fix the previous ones as per the EC)? How do you manage to embrace the notion of introducing a new character in the final scene, and then having that character retroactively change the very nature of your enemy and your entire mission?

Is it all just a case of elective blindness, or is it more like: "Yeah, there are flaws, but I don't mind them."

First, the way i see it there are no major plotholes...everything that is not directly spoken out for you is pretty easy to explain.

The Catalyst is no new Character...it is the origin/motivation of the reapers. He was represented through the reapers so far. It is like meeting the father of dr. No, so you can understand why dr. No is the way he is.
The reapers did not change...they are just explained.

You your self have case of elective blindness if you think the issues of ME 3 outweight the issues of ME 1 and 2.

It goes both ways. a matter of perspective.

Modifié par maaaze, 10 août 2012 - 03:56 .

[Pitznik]

Jassu1979 wrote...

So... for constructive criticism: how exactly *do* you supporters manage to ignore the plot holes (or the NEW plot holes intended to fix the previous ones as per the EC)? How do you manage to embrace the notion of introducing a new character in the final scene, and then having that character retroactively change the very nature of your enemy and your entire mission?

Is it all just a case of elective blindness, or is it more like: "Yeah, there are flaws, but I don't mind them."

There are no significant plotholes, and minor ones can just be ignored, like in ME or ME2. Catalyst isn't really a new character, he is personification of all Reapers. It wasn't really a good move to put him there, but that is a minor annoyance, not the end of the world. I don't consider my entire mission changed, it was always "stop the Reapers" and I stick with it.

[Jassu1979]

"No (significant) plotholes", huh?

Oooo-kay. I suppose it's selective blindness, then. For honestly, no amount of mental gymnastics could possibly rationalize the narrative atrocity that is the Normandy Evacuation scene, from Shepard ordering the Normandy over in the middle of a critical mission just to pick up two slightly hurt team members, over the Normandy arriving in a matter of SECONDS to neither Harbinger nor Joker bothering to take a shot at the other.

It was exactly the sort of BS-explanation I expected from the EC (because the writers clearly had to make something up on the fly), even if I hoped for something better.

And yes, the Catalyst IS a new character. What you describe here would have worked if they had foreshadowed the presence of this entity *right from the start*, beginning with ME1. The Catalyst retroactively changes the motivation, purpose and nature of the Reapers. They are not "just explained".

[SeptimusMagistos]

Jassu1979 wrote...

So... for constructive criticism: how exactly *do* you supporters manage to ignore the plot holes (or the NEW plot holes intended to fix the previous ones as per the EC)?

What plot holes?

Jassu1979 wrote...
How do you manage to embrace the notion of introducing a new character in the final scene, and then having that character retroactively change the very nature of your enemy and your entire mission?

I don't have a problem with it.

We never exactly knew why we were fighting the Reapers. Now the controlling intelligence behind them shows up and tells us why. And sure, it's a stupid reason, but that doesn't matter because he is impressed enough with my performace to step aside and let me be the one to decide what to do. Victory achieved at the price of a couple of minutes of expository dialogue.

Why is this such a problem?

[DirtyPhoenix]

Jassu1979 wrote...
The Catalyst retroactively changes the motivation, purpose and nature of the Reapers. They are not "just explained".

For the motives of teh reapers to have changed, they have to be explained previously. Were we told about the reaper's motives in ME1 or ME2?

[Mazebook]

Jassu1979 wrote...

"No (significant) plotholes", huh?

Oooo-kay. I suppose it's selective blindness, then. For honestly, no amount of mental gymnastics could possibly rationalize the narrative atrocity that is the Normandy Evacuation scene, from Shepard ordering the Normandy over in the middle of a critical mission just to pick up two slightly hurt team members, over the Normandy arriving in a matter of SECONDS to neither Harbinger nor Joker bothering to take a shot at the other.

It was exactly the sort of BS-explanation I expected from the EC (because the writers clearly had to make something up on the fly), even if I hoped for something better.

And yes, the Catalyst IS a new character. What you describe here would have worked if they had foreshadowed the presence of this entity *right from the start*, beginning with ME1. The Catalyst retroactively changes the motivation, purpose and nature of the Reapers. They are not "just explained".

The evacuation scene maybe a stretch but it makes sense that Shaperd does not want his friends to die.
So he made a decision based on friendship.

Harbinger is busy shooting the people who come at him. Joker is busy to stay alive and he would have made little difference at the attack.

and no the Catalyst is no new Character...he is a representation of the Reapers. forshadowing would not have changed anything.

Would you mind explaining what the motivation and purpose and nature of the Reapers were before the Catalyst?

As is see it they were completely  unexplained and vague...so the catalyst finally gives context.
 

[LiarasShield]

Another Issue is that their is not hint to the catalyst existence in me2 or me1 and presenting a new antagonist in the final 5 or 10 minutes of a story is wrong or drasticlly altering the plote from the past 2 games in the last 5 or 10 minutes as wrong


Also Pitznik The Reapers Are Synthetic and Catalyst is A Virtual intelligence U_u

[DirtyPhoenix]

LiarasShield wrote...
Also Pitznik The Reapers Are Synthetic and Catalyst is A Virtual intelligence U_u

Reapers are organic-synthetic hybrids, and the catalyst is an artificial intelligence. Also, what drastic alteration of plot are we talking about?

[LiarasShield]

pirate1802 wrote...

LiarasShield wrote...
Also Pitznik The Reapers Are Synthetic and Catalyst is A Virtual intelligence U_u

Reapers are organic-synthetic hybrids, and the catalyst is an artificial intelligence. Also, what drastic alteration of plot are we talking about?

Their was np hint to the catalyst or any reaper collective virtual intelligence in either me1 or me2 the reapers as we saw were powerful intelligent unifed machines willing to wipe us out also they didn't really need a explaination for why they did things

But in me3 we still know nothing of the catalyst until the last 5 or 10 minutes he effectively becomes the new main antagonist or effectilve alters mass effect 1 or 2 in the last ten minutes you don't alter the plot you don't introduce a new main character that completely alters the story or the reapers in the final minutes of a story that just isn't acceptable.

[Pitznik]

Jassu1979 wrote...

"No (significant) plotholes", huh?

Oooo-kay. I suppose it's selective blindness, then. For honestly, no amount of mental gymnastics could possibly rationalize the narrative atrocity that is the Normandy Evacuation scene, from Shepard ordering the Normandy over in the middle of a critical mission just to pick up two slightly hurt team members, over the Normandy arriving in a matter of SECONDS to neither Harbinger nor Joker bothering to take a shot at the other.

It was exactly the sort of BS-explanation I expected from the EC (because the writers clearly had to make something up on the fly), even if I hoped for something better.

And yes, the Catalyst IS a new character. What you describe here would have worked if they had foreshadowed the presence of this entity *right from the start*, beginning with ME1. The Catalyst retroactively changes the motivation, purpose and nature of the Reapers. They are not "just explained".

Yes, evacuation scene is BS. It is unreasonable and doesn't make much sense no way how to look at it. But how important it is, really? I really don't care about stuff like that.

And no, Catalyst isn't really a new character, he IS the Reapers. His presence could be deducted, but he manifested only through his tools. Still, not really a good move to put him there, but again, I consider him not much more than interface in form of an AI.

LiarasShield wrote...

Also Pitznik The Reapers Are Synthetic and Catalyst is A Virtual intelligence U_u

They really aren't synthetic, they are organic material put in synthetic, "man made" shells. They would make them sort of half organic/half synthetic.

Even if we consider Reapers synthetic, not all synthetics are Reapers. So the fact Catalyst predicts synthetic threat, doesn't mean he predicts a Reaper threat. Reapers are gone for good, unless some genius rebuilds them - but that is something you can't possibly stop from happening, not in any possible ending, official or fan made.

And let me repeat again - you DON'T have to agree with his logic. Both Destroy and Control don't make you confirm his ridiculous plan, you destroy/take his tools away from him, giving nothing back. And that is what I recommend for anybody.

[wizardryforever]

LiarasShield wrote...

Another Issue is that their is not hint to the catalyst existence in me2 or me1 and presenting a new antagonist in the final 5 or 10 minutes of a story is wrong or drasticlly altering the plote from the past 2 games in the last 5 or 10 minutes as wrong


Also Pitznik The Reapers Are Synthetic and Catalyst is A Virtual intelligence U_u

While the Catalyst is new because he's introduced in ME3, he doesn't come out of nowhere like so many people are saying.  The Catalyst is mentioned as being the missing part of the Crucible, and that we need to find out what it is and get it.  Then Vendetta says that the Citadel is the Catalyst.  This is the reason for the Citadel being moved to Earth, and the whole reason for the ground assault.  The only thing that is introduced at the end is the fact that the Catalyst is sentient.  This isn't diabolus ex machina, it's just a plot twist.