304 réponses à ce sujet

[AlphaScrewySam]

I love how people in this thread are literally using the exact arguments the OP already took apart. Can you people read at all? 'Oh, the Reapers are invulnerable! THE REAPERS ARE INVULNERABLE!!!'. ****ing idiots. Leviathan pwned one like it weren't no thing. Throughout the entirety of the campaign, we hear about people killing Reapers, like the nuclear warheads snuck aboard when the Reapers opened up to indoctrinate the leadership.

To quote Sergeant Johnson from Halo: 'They're tough, but they ain't invincible.

[DarthSliver]

ok ok ok, people your forget the Catalyst states that its programming was altered when you hooked up the Crucible to the Citadel. Therefore logic tells me its not lying because you altered it and allowed it to see different ways using the Crucible to solve its problem between machine and organics.

I also would like to say I dont agree with the RGB ending I am with others that it needed to be thrown out the Window, It shouldve worked at the scene known as "Best Seats in the House" with the thing going off and wiping the Reapers out. If you didnt have high EMS than it did more than take the Reapers out, it would damage their technology.

Modifié par DarthSliver, 02 septembre 2012 - 09:20 .

[V-rcingetorix]

Conventional victory is possible. That's the Codex talking, not just random people.

Given enough warning and the right tactics, the galaxy could've met the Reapers head-to-head and smacked them back into Dark Space like a home run from Mickey Mantle.

However, the galaxy didn't take the warning (except Urdnot Wrex, who's been stockpiling weapons for over 3 years). Admiral Hackett states there is no possible way for a conventional victory, and all right, I can accept that.

Making the Crucible/Catalyst into a red/blue/green...much more debatable. I made another thread "By the Numbers" calculating the total possible number of Reapers and the count was high (deliberately), but not unbeatable. Hacketts tactic of pitting two giant forces against each other was going back to the Bronze Age when they lined up and yelled at each other before a battle.

Agreed with DarthSilver, the "Best Seats in the House" would have been perfect for a series of exploding Reapers. Harbinger could've come in for a final Boss battle (damaged, so it would be humanly possible to beat him), and it would've made so much sense! If the Citadel was supposed to call in the Reapers, that means it was designed to connect/talk with all of them! Anything the Catalyst pumps out, by definition, is pumped into the Reapers.

Let's hope DLC can fix this...or add a better Closure.

[V-rcingetorix]

Conventional victory is possible. That's the Codex talking, not just random people.

Given enough warning and the right tactics, the galaxy could've met the Reapers head-to-head and smacked them back into Dark Space like a home run from Mickey Mantle.

However, the galaxy didn't take the warning (except Urdnot Wrex, who's been stockpiling weapons for over 3 years). Admiral Hackett states there is no possible way for a conventional victory, and all right, I can accept that.

Making the Crucible/Catalyst into a red/blue/green...much more debatable. I made another thread "By the Numbers" calculating the total possible number of Reapers and the count was high (deliberately), but not unbeatable. Hacketts tactic of pitting two giant forces against each other was going back to the Bronze Age when they lined up and yelled at each other before a battle.

Agreed with DarthSilver, the "Best Seats in the House" would have been perfect for a series of exploding Reapers. Harbinger could've come in for a final Boss battle (damaged, so it would be humanly possible to beat him), and it would've made so much sense! If the Citadel was supposed to call in the Reapers, that means it was designed to connect/talk with all of them! Anything the Catalyst pumps out, by definition, is pumped into the Reapers.

Let's hope DLC can fix this...or add a better Closure.

[loungeshep]

I would like a post refuse DLC, yes. That would be awesome.

[Saurd]

wwinters99 wrote...

Pitznik wrote...

Omega 4 suicide mission - impossible UNLESS reaper IFF, loyal squad, etc
Peace between the Geth and Quarians - impossible UNLESS loyal Tali, loyal Legion etc
Defeating the Reapers - impossible UNLESS the Crucible, allied galaxy

The above are all impossible WITHOUT SHEPARD.

We are told over and over in ME2 that the suicide mission is impossible, yet Shepard can bring everyone back alive.

We are told over and over in ME3 that the reapers are unbeatable, yet....oops, yes the are, too bad, buy DLC.

i ROFL'd so hard

[TheRealBugz]

DLC will build up to a "conventional Victory" most likely. DLC is pointless if you know how the game ends. BW knows that... probably.

[skate4tacos96]

I would love to see a conventional victory. As said in the game, Shepard has built a career upon performing the impossible. And yes while it is true that all of the "impossible" challenges throughout the franchise were only impossible unless certain perameters are met, well a conventional victory could have it's own perameters. I fully support the idea of a conventional victory, and it SHOULD happen. Picking one of Starbrat's solutions feels more like an insult than anything else.

[DarthSliver]

But I think the best thing from this topic is I think people would like to see DLC effect the ending making it more worthwhile to get. The fact that dlc just add war assets is a big turn off to get them.

[shodiswe]

Ah, yes, you defeated the reapers and blew up the citadel, but during the long years there arn't enough peopel left to sustain the galactic civilization, the relays are gone and all inhabitable worlds are now toxic and uninhabitable, swarming with agressive nanites melting everything in your path.

This cycle is doom but at least the Reapers are gone aswell..

You hope that whatever damage was wrought will decline in next few billion years, and that life will flurish a new....

[AlphaScrewySam]

Oh, and the people saying 'at least one or two species should go extinct if we have a conventional victory', keep in mind that the final battle does not have every member of every species. The only species that potentially may have brought every single member is the Geth, who are destroyed in the proper, or 'red' ending anyway. There would still be millions of civilians of the other species scattered across the galaxy.

[Vigil_N7]

What I don't see is how it would add anything further to the endings we already have.

Using the crucible comes with a price, Shepard dies and becomes the new catalyst, or shepard dies and organics and synthetics no longer exist separately, or shepard destroys the reapers at the cost of possibly the Geth, EDI and all advanced tech for the next couple of decades or centuries. This is a fair price to pay.

Refusing to pay that price means the forces of this cycle lose, but their knowledge is passed onto the next that are then victorious.

All endings will result in a victorious galaxy, whether or not its by the catalyst or the next cycle. What else does there need to be? I disagree with your argument that it wouldn't invalidate the other endings. You cite ME2 as an example, but honestly its a completely different example. A squad member dieing doesn't change the ending of ME2, outside of a few seconds of Shepard mourning them, but the end result is the same. This isn't the case in ME3 clearly, and if conventional victory was possible, then what is the point of the other three endings? They all result in a higher price paid, with the exception of destroy where only the geth, EDI and advanced tech suffer any sort of loss. But ofcourse, why not then just pick destroy since both endings will result in heavy casualties?


I don't see why people want a conventional victory when destroy is an option. For me that, along with the current conventional victory, is refusing the Catalyst's logic by blowing it, the reapers and the damn whole thing up. Shepard survives, your crew survive, EDI and the Geth die, but those heavy losses will no doubt be no different than what you have proposed in your conventional victory, or else why the one with the heavier losses?

Right now I think there is a perfect balance:
Destroy - Shepard lives (?), reapers are outright destroyed, but advanced tech is damaged considerably, EDI dies, Shepard inadvertently causes genocide (if the geth are alive at this point) galaxy saved.

Control - Shepard dies, takes control of reapers which fix the relays very quickly, life continues as normal, Shepard acts as a galactic peacekeeper of sorts if paragon, everybody else lives. Reapers still exist, but galaxy is saved.

Synthesis - Shepard dies, but the new Organic-Synthetic hybrid will also mean that there will never be war or the threat of extinction of either ever again, galaxy is at peace, pinnacle of evolution is reached (rightly/wrongly), reapers pass knowledge of previous civilizations, everybody lives and is happy, galaxy is saved.

Refusal - Reapers win, Shepard refuses to use the crucible and refuses to listen to the catalyst, knowledge of this cycle is passed down to the next and they win. everyone dies, but 50000 years later the galaxy is saved.

4 different choices, each with their own merits and their own disadvantages

[Dean_the_Young]

TheRealBugz wrote...

DLC will build up to a "conventional Victory" most likely. DLC is pointless if you know how the game ends. BW knows that... probably.

Since when?

Besides that none of the other ME DLC ever changed the endings for those games, few pieces of DLC actually change the endings of their games.

[MattFini]

Foolsfolly wrote...

Rommel49 wrote...

redBadger14 wrote...

Based on existing lore, its impossible for there to be a conventional victory against Reapers. So, no, you're wrong OP.

Nothing else to say that hasn't already been said.

Sadly, you're the one that's mistaken. The existing information actually states the opposite, that a conventional victory against the Reapers is atleast theoretically possible. To repost it, right from the codex entry on Reaper Vulnerabilities:

"Although clearly technologically superior to the Citadel forces, the Reapers have experienced casualties in the battles across the galaxy. This indicates that, theoretically, with the right intelligence, weapons, and strategy, the Reapers could be defeated"

If only we had.... some kind of ancient technology that showed their weaknesses.... or perhaps some sort of base, if you would, that was designed to create Reapers that we could mine for information. Or access to a 'dead' or 'disabled' Reaper so we could test their shields and copy their tech to even the odds a bit more.

And if only we'd been collecting this sort of tech and knowledge throughout the whole series so we had the tools and the time to use it against the Reapers.

Oh, well....

This is why the writers should've applied more significance to the Collector Base at the end of ME2.

Play your cards right and you obtain some technology that allowes you to build weapons that MATCH the reaper's lasers - making it a fair fight of might-on-might.

Hell, I figured that was the entire significance of Shepard looking at Harbinger's schematic at the end of ME2.

That would've been better than the silly Crucible plotline we got in ME3.

[BiO]

My main problem with a successful refuse ending is that it invalidates most of the game, gathering forces to help build the crucible.

MattFini wrote...

This is why the writers should've applied more significance to the Collector Base at the end of ME2.

Play your cards right and you obtain some technology that allowes you to build weapons that MATCH the reaper's lasers - making it a fair fight of might-on-might.

Hell, I figured that was the entire significance of Shepard looking at Harbinger's schematic at the end of ME2.

That would've been better than the silly Crucible plotline we got in ME3.

We defeat the reapers with giant lazorz. How intuitive.

Modifié par BiO_MaN, 05 septembre 2012 - 12:56 .

[Shermos]

It should not and it will not. Bioware is not interested in wrecking its game.

[ghost9191]

why not just have destroy destroy only the reapers. depending on war assets and outcome of geth / quarian conflict

that way they don't make the crucible pointless. and those that like control and synthesis still have them as options,,. given most reasons behind choosing them they might pick them still

and control could also be the renegade choice, like me2

Modifié par ghost9191, 05 septembre 2012 - 01:08 .

[Dean_the_Young]

ghost9191 wrote...

why not just have destroy destroy only the reapers. depending on war assets and outcome of geth / quarian conflict

Because of the thematic rational and the point of balancing the choices with virtues and flaws, rather than just virtues?

'Destroy' isn't simply targetting the Reapers because the Reapers aren't the actual issue being addressed here: synthetics as a threat, as a whole, are.

[ghost9191]

yeah i know, was just saying doing that would be more likely, that way they wouldn't make the crucible pointless

i get the reasons behind it all * holds urge back to make smartass comment* just saying

the geth alone disprovve the whole synthetic organic thing . but again wasn't really my point. everyone and their mother knows about the catalysts logic ,. don't try to learn me<_<

i believe there is more to it, the options can't be catalysts but are influenced by the crucible , otherwise they would have had to needed the citadel from the begining , and not a whole over time thing. so the destroy option and such were built into the crucible, and the crucible was made to solve the reaper threat not some organic synthetic problem, that we know

Modifié par ghost9191, 05 septembre 2012 - 01:24 .

[Pitznik]

Dean_the_Young wrote...

ghost9191 wrote...

why not just have destroy destroy only the reapers. depending on war assets and outcome of geth / quarian conflict

Because of the thematic rational and the point of balancing the choices with virtues and flaws, rather than just virtues?

'Destroy' isn't simply targetting the Reapers because the Reapers aren't the actual issue being addressed here: synthetics as a threat, as a whole, are.

Destroy doesn't work as a solution to "synthetic threat problem", so it can't be it. It is probably a purely technical limitation, targeting something common for both Reapers and synthetics (since Reapers aren't synthetic as EDI or Geth, they are "artificial" but made from living organic matter).

[Dean_the_Young]

ghost9191 wrote...


the geth alone disprovve the whole synthetic organic thing .

They don't, because at no part in the synthetic-organic thing is a claim that all synthetics are inevitably hostile made.

don't try to learn me<_<

It would be like trying to drown a horse.

[Dean_the_Young]

Pitznik wrote...

Dean_the_Young wrote...

ghost9191 wrote...

why not just have destroy destroy only the reapers. depending on war assets and outcome of geth / quarian conflict

Because of the thematic rational and the point of balancing the choices with virtues and flaws, rather than just virtues?

'Destroy' isn't simply targetting the Reapers because the Reapers aren't the actual issue being addressed here: synthetics as a threat, as a whole, are.

Destroy doesn't work as a solution to "synthetic threat problem", so it can't be it.

It doesn't solve the problem from the Catalyst's perspective, but the catalyst's perspective isn't the standard you need to have.

It is probably a purely technical limitation, targeting something common for both Reapers and synthetics (since Reapers aren't synthetic as EDI or Geth, they are "artificial" but made from living organic matter).

By what brief explanation the Catalyst games, the Destroy wave is more anti-technology than anti-synthetic: it's just that organics remaining should be able to quickly repair the damage, whereas the synthetics aren't in a position to repair themselves.

[V-rcingetorix]

Shermos wrote...

It should not and it will not. Bioware is not interested in wrecking its game.

For the first 90%, I agree BW is not interested in wrecking its game. But it's too late for the last 10 minutes or so.

[ghost9191]

Dean_the_Young wrote...

ghost9191 wrote...


the geth alone disprovve the whole synthetic organic thing .

They don't, because at no part in the synthetic-organic thing is a claim that all synthetics are inevitably hostile made.

don't try to learn me<_<

It would be like trying to drown a horse.

from the evidence that we have, well besides that whole leviathan thing that happened countless years ago in the ME universe, no synthetic race was hostile towards organics, not without reaper influence

and again, the crucible had to have the options built into it, otehrwise it wouldn't have be useful without the citadel, which wasn't added til later. and if it was built in then why be built for the purpose of stoping organic/synthetic conflict if it was built to stop the reapers

wording is probably off but still

just need more info on the crucible. and this thread is not the place for this i suppose

[Pitznik]

Dean_the_Young wrote...

Pitznik wrote...

Dean_the_Young wrote...

ghost9191 wrote...

why not just have destroy destroy only the reapers. depending on war assets and outcome of geth / quarian conflict

Because of the thematic rational and the point of balancing the choices with virtues and flaws, rather than just virtues?

'Destroy' isn't simply targetting the Reapers because the Reapers aren't the actual issue being addressed here: synthetics as a threat, as a whole, are.

Destroy doesn't work as a solution to "synthetic threat problem", so it can't be it.

It doesn't solve the problem from the Catalyst's perspective, but the catalyst's perspective isn't the standard you need to have.

I don't understand. In my opinion the effect of the red wave reflects the perspective of its creators, which is assumed to be "synthetics are evil!" if it is Catalyst, and "Reapers are evil!" if the creators are organic. Perspective of creators would have to "Synthetics are a threat, but Reapers are even worse" - that doesn't make sense to me, at all. I prefer to interpret this as technical limitation, because I have no reason to think Crucible's creators meant to destroy synthetics.

By what brief explanation the Catalyst games, the Destroy wave is more anti-technology than anti-synthetic: it's just that organics remaining should be able to quickly repair the damage, whereas the synthetics aren't in a position to repair themselves.

I don't know, I assumed the more precise the red beam is, the less things it affects - destroying the technology in spaceships would be disastrous, yet nothing like it shown to happen in high EMS. Since it is space magic we're talking about, I always assumed red wave targets specifically the code that is synthetic life alone, only software, not hardware. That would lead to further assumption that reapers except for organic goo are also containing some programming code, which isn't even that surprising, considering how much technology tehy have inside.

Modifié par Pitznik, 05 septembre 2012 - 01:45 .