419 réponses à ce sujet

[Cainne Chapel]

While that is true,d ont forget Harbinger wasn't reallyr evelaed as a Reaper until the end and yes its true we didnt get a whole lot of interaction with the reapers in ME3, we did talk to the head reaper organizer so to speak, not what some of us would have liked sure, but Harby didnt seem in much fo a mood to talk when he was wiping us out with laser eyes...

[Dean_the_Young]

Jamie9 wrote...

Dean_the_Young wrote...

KENNY4753 wrote...

"don't get too attached to a plot" then what is the reason for playing the games

For the plots as a whole, rather than fixating on one plot in particular.

Focusing on a subplot is like fixating on a character: it's all fun and fine so long as it matches your personal desires, but the moment the author's direction diverges from yours you're going to have problems.

Yep, you should always keep in mind a main plot and have all your side plots tie into in some way. Getting carried away, you can lose focus very quickly.

The only thing here is that Harbinger is the leader of the main antagonists. It's not as if BioWare killed him off like they did Sovereign. It's a HUGE hanging thread, and it should have been addressed.

The only group that Harbinger led was the Collectors, who were never the main antagonists.

Nowhere in ME2 was Harbinger established or claimed to be the leader of the Reaper hoard.

[Jamie9]

Dean_the_Young wrote...
Where in ME2 was Harbinger ever set up as the leader of the Reapers?

He's the biggest Reaper, with a unique look. He is also seemingly the one leading the rest of the Reapers towards the Milky War at the end of ME2, and towards the Alpha Relay in "Arrival".

In ME3's codex, it is literally stated that the Alliance considers Harbinger to be the leader.

[plfranke]

@Dean he was at the very least the face of the primary antogonist, and he was set up to be the leader of the Reapers when you see him in front when they're flying towards Earth, I really don't see how anyone could have not believed he was the leader.
On another note I certainly don't see how "You will feel pain Shepard." is foreshadowing "The Reapers are not interested in war. We are like a cleansing fire blah blah blah"

[JamieCOTC]

"Don't get too attached to a plot"

That's actually very good advice ... for a writer. Wish someone had said this to Casey and Mack when they thought up the Catalyst kid and the singularity BS.

[plfranke]

SubAstris wrote...

plfranke wrote...

This was Jessica Merizan's response to me when asked why Harbinger was silent in mass effect 3. What does everyone think about this?

F*** ME, this ain't real, right?

I'm afraid it is Sub.

[bleetman]

Oh for crying out loud.

[KENNY4753]

Jamie9 wrote...

Dean_the_Young wrote...
Where in ME2 was Harbinger ever set up as the leader of the Reapers?

He's the biggest Reaper, with a unique look. He is also seemingly the one leading the rest of the Reapers towards the Milky War at the end of ME2, and towards the Alpha Relay in "Arrival".

In ME3's codex, it is literally stated that the Alliance considers Harbinger to be the leader.

Makes sense to me

[SpamBot2000]

This is what happens when Twitter is regarded as a legitimate medium for communication.

[Conniving_Eagle]

Someone call the ranch hands, BSN is getting ornery again.

[Mr.House]

Dean_the_Young wrote...

M0keys wrote...

Dean_the_Young wrote...

KENNY4753 wrote...

"don't get too attached to a plot" then what is the reason for playing the games

For the plots as a whole, rather than fixating on one plot in particular.

Focusing on a subplot is like fixating on a character: it's all fun and fine so long as it matches your personal desires, but the moment the author's direction diverges from yours you're going to have problems.

but harbinger was the bad guy

Correction: Harbinger was a bad guy. One of many. Of the many Reapers, his only distinguishing role was puppet master of the Collectors, which Shepard killed.

Are oyu kidding me? Harbinger was obessed with Shepard, he even had a major role in Arrival where he TALKED to Shepard and told her to get ready. When you talk to that unnamed Reaper on Rannoch he outright tells you Harbinger speaks of you. Listen to every single qoute of Harbinger. He is obsessed with Shepard, he is also a talker and very loud. ME2 and Arrival showed us this. Then in ME3 we hear how he LED the Reapers into the Galaxy and he is the biggest Reaper and one people regonise right away. He also made his personal "base" at Earth.

Then at the end, he does nothing but land and shoot lazers, then leaves and that's it. No conversation with Shepard, not even a clip of showing him die. Bioware outright through away the main villian of ME2 who was built up in a game and in dlc.If Bioware didn't want Harbinger to be the leader of the Reapers, then they outright failed, not to mention hardly any forshadowing to Starbrat. Hell if they wanted Starbrat, Arrival would have been the perfect time to start building up to his reveal. Not give us a conversation with Harbinger that 1:Bult him up and 2:Showed his obsession with Shepard.

Modifié par Mr.House, 19 août 2012 - 08:55 .

[7he Island Head]

lol nerd rage

[M0keys]

Dean_the_Young wrote...

Jamie9 wrote...

Dean_the_Young wrote...

KENNY4753 wrote...

"don't get too attached to a plot" then what is the reason for playing the games

For the plots as a whole, rather than fixating on one plot in particular.

Focusing on a subplot is like fixating on a character: it's all fun and fine so long as it matches your personal desires, but the moment the author's direction diverges from yours you're going to have problems.

Yep, you should always keep in mind a main plot and have all your side plots tie into in some way. Getting carried away, you can lose focus very quickly.

The only thing here is that Harbinger is the leader of the main antagonists. It's not as if BioWare killed him off like they did Sovereign. It's a HUGE hanging thread, and it should have been addressed.

The only group that Harbinger led was the Collectors, who were never the main antagonists.

Nowhere in ME2 was Harbinger established or claimed to be the leader of the Reaper hoard.

but he felt like the leader, he felt like the bad guy. people like to have bad guys if they're established as being powerful and threatening... little nitpicky canon things can cease to matter if your story still works on an emotional level like that

[LucasShark]

Dean_the_Young wrote...

Jamie9 wrote...

Dean_the_Young wrote...

KENNY4753 wrote...

"don't get too attached to a plot" then what is the reason for playing the games

For the plots as a whole, rather than fixating on one plot in particular.

Focusing on a subplot is like fixating on a character: it's all fun and fine so long as it matches your personal desires, but the moment the author's direction diverges from yours you're going to have problems.

Yep, you should always keep in mind a main plot and have all your side plots tie into in some way. Getting carried away, you can lose focus very quickly.

The only thing here is that Harbinger is the leader of the main antagonists. It's not as if BioWare killed him off like they did Sovereign. It's a HUGE hanging thread, and it should have been addressed.

The only group that Harbinger led was the Collectors, who were never the main antagonists.

Nowhere in ME2 was Harbinger established or claimed to be the leader of the Reaper hoard.

Um...:
- Arrival, dialogue and visuals
- The conclusion of ME2
- the reveal that the collector general wasn't actually in charge

ME3:
- The intro mission
- The final mission
- The mother sodding codex entry

[Dean_the_Young]

[quote]M0keys wrote...

But we needed a good bad guy if there was going to be one.[/quote]The Reapers already provide one as a whole, because the Reapers are a threat as a whole.

And for a foe with a face, the Illusive Man and Cerberus are pretty obvious.
[quote]
Sovereign was the bad guy until he got killed

[quote]
Harbinger was the bad guy until he was forgotten[/quote]Harbinger was the bad guy until we wiped out his basis of relevance, the Collectors.


Once the Reaper host arrived, there was no basis for any one of them being The Bad Guy.
[quote]
Illusive man didn't count[/quote]He does, regardless if you like him or not.
[quote]because he was just a flanderized lackey of the reapers, [/quote]He wasn't, at least not until the end-game.

[quote]
and starchild was just a total mind freak non-antagonist.[/quote]The Star Child is the anthromorphization of all the Reapers together. He was very much an antagonist.

[quote]
the entire conflict of the story fell apart because suddenly there were no challenges to the protagonist that Bioware wanted to recognize at the end
[/quote]Well, unless you ignore the armada that's wiping out the galactic civilization and the rogue army that's screwing over your attempts to stop the Reapers.

[Ticonderoga117]

Dean_the_Young wrote...
Where in ME2 was Harbinger ever set up as the leader of the Reapers?

Always seemed like it to me. Granted, when he was using "we", he could've been talking about just himself, or himself and the Collectors, but to me it seems like "Me and the other Reapers."

There are many flaws that can be applied to ME3, but a lack of foreshadowing isn't one of them.

"Dark Energy is killing this star."
"The scientists are worried about Dark Energy."
"The Collectors had lots of Dark Energy readings."
"I'm now working on something dealing with Dark Energy."
*Game shows Shepard with datapad with Reaper data*
"Prepare for our Arrival!"
"Shepard, you're going to have to come in and face the music."
*The Collector Base decision is the BIG decision of the game.*

So Dark Energy, the Collector Base, and the trial, all of which got hit in the head by Mac Walters because "Pffft. Don't get attached to things we've done!".

[AresKeith]

Harbinger showed every trait of being the main bad guy for ME3, especially after Arrival

[Dean_the_Young]

M0keys wrote...

but he felt like the leader,

'Felt' is not the same thing as 'was claimed to be.'

People projected a role onto Harbinger that was never claimed. That's their fault, and it isn't Bioware's responsibility to address a claim they never made.

people like to have bad guys if they're established as being powerful and threatening... little nitpicky canon things can cease to matter if your story still works on an emotional level like that

Mass Effect 3 hardly lacks for malevolent forces and bad guys.

[jackkel dragon]

JamieCOTC wrote...

"Don't get too attached to a plot"

That's actually very good advice ... for a writer. Wish someone had said this to Casey and Mack when they thought up the Catalyst kid and the singularity BS.

It might have been good advice for a lot of the main plot of ME3, actually. While a lot of cool things happen, ME3 is actually the most linear of the ME games, and has the smallest amount of braching points outside of sidequests. I could probably name at least 3 segments of the game where I'd have been pleased to see a consequence from a previous game's choice rather than the predetermined version of events, no matter how specific and special the writers had made it.

[SlottsMachine]

The reapers where turned into a joke, how could they make Harbinger a convincing antagonist under those circumstances.

[essarr71]

plfranke wrote...

@Dean he was at the very least the face of the primary antogonist, and he was set up to be the leader of the Reapers when you see him in front when they're flying towards Earth, I really don't see how anyone could have not believed he was the leader.
 

Yet your argument can be dismissed with, "he never said he was their leader."  Why is this so hard to understand?  The leader of the reapers was revealed.. maybe.. who can make sense of it.  It's a horrible move plotwise.  But it doesn't break anything regarding the pecking order.  

[F4H bandicoot]

AresKeith wrote...

Harbinger showed every trait of being the main bad guy for ME3, especially after Arrival

Indeed

[M0keys]

Dean_the_Young wrote...

M0keys wrote...

But we needed a good bad guy if there was going to be one.

The Reapers already provide one as a whole, because the Reapers are a threat as a whole.

And for a foe with a face, the Illusive Man and Cerberus are pretty obvious.

but Illusive Man was simplified to the point of being an ineffectual lackey instead of a complex foe, and was only used as a cheat to impede player progress. he was never really used to challenge the player's endurance and beliefs like a true antagonist.

[R3MUS]

Well, here is my classic reaction to no Harbinger conversation/fight in ME3:



Kinda sums it all up.

[Malanek]

When you pick refuse isn't it is Harbinger who utters "So be it"? This strongly hints that Harbinger was the star child.