398 réponses à ce sujet

[AlanC9]

Greylycantrope wrote...

Again you're assuming there was even going to be an invasion of the main islands. Japan was running low on moral, resources and manpower. They were outnumbered, outgunned, steadily retreating, friendless and surrounded. They were already considering surrender before the nukes were dropped.

Arguably true. Sitting around and waiting six months or so was doable. Would we have still been napalming civilians for those six months?

[GimmeDaGun]

AlanC9 wrote...

GimmeDaGun wrote...

dreman9999 wrote...
It would have us kill civilian to invade. Heck, some would commit suicide. More bloodshed would happen if we invaded then dropping the bombs.
We also did not want to lose more lives to this war.

Yeah, I understand that, but it does not justify or make the the dropping of the A-bombs look any better. You can't justify direct genocide even if it was commited to defend the life of soldiers (who wield weapons and usually are not defenceless, unlike civilians). Also I find this explanation a bit naive.

Eve if you want to assume that killing any number of soldiers no matter how large is better than killing any civilians  at all -- and we'd crossed that line several years before the A-bombs came along -- an invasion would still have killed more civilians than the A-bombs did, if Saipan and Okinawa are any indication. In addition to all the soldiers on both sides.

What you say is based on speculation (the offensive never happened and as far as I know it wasn't really necessary at that point), while the two A-bombs are fact and we all know the effects and the aftermath. I also find it kind of unbelievable that the sole reason behind dropping the A-bombs (not one, but two!) was to save lives. No, it sounds very naive to me. Things don't work that way, especially in a war. 

And you also slip over the fact that Japan was at the brink of capitulation by that time. They were retreating and giving up the war. The two A-bombs were like shooting a beaten, toothless, limp lion with a  bazooka twice - from a strategic point of view.

It was more like a demonstration of power and the new super weapon from the US's part to the Soviets and to the rest of the world, and it was also a human experiment. No theory or effort could wash this blood stained rug clean.  

Modifié par GimmeDaGun, 27 septembre 2012 - 04:34 .

[GimmeDaGun]

AlanC9 wrote...

Greylycantrope wrote...

Again you're assuming there was even going to be an invasion of the main islands. Japan was running low on moral, resources and manpower. They were outnumbered, outgunned, steadily retreating, friendless and surrounded. They were already considering surrender before the nukes were dropped.

Arguably true. Sitting around and waiting six months or so was doable. Would we have still been napalming civilians for those six months?

The Japanese Empire was collapsing. It wasn't a matter of months but weeks and it was completely harmless at that point, even napalming or bombing wouldn't have been necessary. 

I still can't see how the using of the A-bomb can be justified. Just imagine if Japan had nukes first and the war went ill for you and they were pressing on your borders. Imagine that your armies were scattered, tattered and torn, completely exhausted and out of supplies, and then the Japanese drop an A-bomb on L.A. and 5 days later another one (bigge this time) on San Francisco. It would have been the same: and now some guy would explain it to you that it was necessary to save american lives (sic)!... sounds kind of absurd to me.

Modifié par GimmeDaGun, 27 septembre 2012 - 04:37 .

[GreyLycanTrope]

AlanC9 wrote...

Greylycantrope wrote...

Again you're assuming there was even going to be an invasion of the main islands. Japan was running low on moral, resources and manpower. They were outnumbered, outgunned, steadily retreating, friendless and surrounded. They were already considering surrender before the nukes were dropped.

Arguably true. Sitting around and waiting six months or so was doable. Would we have still been napalming civilians for those six months?

Prossibly though not sure to what extent. The last couple of air strikes the US launched pre nukes targeted fueling depots and such. They were literally waiting the Japanese out while doing bombing strikes on their military, industrial, infrastructure and government centers. The idea was to demorlize the enemy as muchas take out their ability to defend themselves. The nukes just made things move faster, demands for unconditional surrender came during the bomb drops. When Japan didn't do it automatically after the Hiroshima, Nagasaki got hit three days later to emphasize the point of how hopeless their situation was.

Modifié par Greylycantrope, 27 septembre 2012 - 04:40 .

[fil009]

Criticizing history is always easy. Collateral damage is part of war; that’s why its so terrible and why wars over religion (fairy tales) are exceptionally idiotic. The USA doesn't speak German or Japanese right now, that’s what matters.

[ollec92]

Bioware will probably listen to the complaints and be more casus in their approach to new games.
The thing everyone should realize though is that far from everyone that has played the ME games visit these forums, and far from everyone are actually make regular posts. Rather obvious really, but the thing most don’t realize is that people with negative opinions are fare more likely to make their opinions heard (basic psychology). People who spend their times in special forums are often rather similar, they often share some similar personality features, hence they are more likely to feel the same way about a certain things. So the amount (percentage) of people who think the endings are bad is certainly far smaller than represented on this forum…

[GreyLycanTrope]

fil009 wrote...

Criticizing history is always easy.
Collateral damage is part of war; that’s why its so terrible and why wars over religion (fairy tales) are exceptionally idiotic. The USA doesn't speak German or Japanese right now, that’s what matters.

Ends justify the means? Not a view I subscribe to, in Mass Effect or real life.

Modifié par Greylycantrope, 27 septembre 2012 - 04:58 .

[GimmeDaGun]

fil009 wrote...

Criticizing history is always easy. Collateral damage is part of war; that’s why its so terrible and why wars over religion (fairy tales) are exceptionally idiotic. The USA doesn't speak German or Japanese right now, that’s what matters.

Sorry discussing history is one of my passions: my father is a historian, and I love reading history books and esseys myself. 

Got to love your last patriotic sentence. I can kind of relate to that because I have similar views about my own country, but maybe that's why I can't care about what language do they speak in the USA (even if the war was lost to you, most probably you would speak English though - nor Japan, nor the Germany intended to invade the US, only you wouldn't have become the influential power you are today (though some say that this status is fading pretty rapidly).

But by your logic one could easily say that the holochaust or the soviet waves of arrests, executions,gulags and the bombing of civilian towns to ashes were only collateral damage. No my friend, war is brutal by nature (no matter what the casus belli is) - there's nothing heroic and nice about it, no matter how much some try to idealize it - but there's a difference between the brutality of war and unnecessary destruction, mass homocide and inhumanity. Those are not collateral damage: but evil human behaviour and deeds. 

War over religious views are just as brutal and sensless as any other war, especially that religions usually stand for love, peace and accaptence. Although I'm a roman catholic and a believer (so to me it's not mere stupid lies and delusions), but I agree with you on this one. But I have yet to see or hear about a war which was waged for a just cause (not the ones that are idealized by the victorious later on) and brought something more than suffering and loss. 

Modifié par GimmeDaGun, 27 septembre 2012 - 05:13 .

[AlanC9]

GimmeDaGun wrote...
What you say is based on speculation (the offensive never happened and as far as I know it wasn't really necessary at that point), while the two A-bombs are fact and we all know the effects and the aftermath. I also find it kind of unbelievable that the sole reason behind dropping the A-bombs (not one, but two!) was to save lives. No, it sounds very naive to me. Things don't work that way, especially in a war. 

And you also slip over the fact that Japan was at the brink of capitulation by that time. They were retreating and giving up the war. The two A-bombs were like shooting a beaten, toothless, limp lion with a  bazooka twice - from a strategic point of view.

It was more like a demonstration of power and the new super weapon from the US's part to the Soviets and to the rest of the world, and it was also a human experiment. No theory or effort could wash this blood stained rug clean.  

Sure, there were other concerns. The problem is, we don't have access to any universe where we didn't drop the bomb. Did Japan surrender in a couple of weeks? Did they surrender after the Olympic langings in October? Did we actually end up launching Coronet? Or was it an Okinawa from one end of the home islands to the other?  And meanwhile, do the Soviets end up occupying all of Korea rather than just the northern half?

Modifié par AlanC9, 27 septembre 2012 - 05:21 .

[The Spamming Troll]

GimmeDaGun wrote...

dreman9999 wrote...

The Spamming Troll wrote...

dreman9999 wrote...

How are the ending poorly written?

really, dremman?

nobodys pointed those things out to you yet?

I'm going to prove my point in one question.


If you were offered the 4 choices in the end in a different way other then the catalyst, lets say EDI offers you these choices, would you be ok with the choices?

I think he decided to hate the ending no matter what... as most who keep on hating it. Maybe we should let ourselves enjoy it and move on. Can't wait for Omega...

dreman, no. not even a +1% boost to my ok-with-choices meter. your under the imprsion changine ONE THING would make it better? whats the point of the dreams if starchild isnt in the dreams? EDI is an idiot AI program built for the normandy. EDI is not important enough in the scheme of things. nobody is. removing the catalyst would have been better then replaceing him.

gimedagun, i hate the ending because of alot of things. i think your problem is you liked the ending no matter what. doesnt matter what would have happened, ultra-bazaro ending, conventional victory ending, whatever, youd have been satisfied. what do you think about that?

you honestly dont think i would atleast try to enjoy ME3? i mean seriously. thats just blindly stupid. naive is what it is. i mean how can you be naive about it, its in front of your face every day on this forum. its the exact thing your here complaining about RIGHT NOW!!! i bought the CE of ME3 because i expected ME3 to be ME3!! d oyou understand? im not complaining about a bargin bin game here i didnt spend playing since '07. a game i honeslty think i could have made better then bioware. i dont like buying things when i think i could do better. im a moron, i shouldnt think i could do better.

Modifié par The Spamming Troll, 27 septembre 2012 - 06:48 .

[Cashmoney007]

So even though some of you on here loved the game, you still don't have any questions about it?  Some of you don't feel like the game could have been even better?  I thought the third game was good but didn't like it as much as ME1 and ME2. 

Modifié par Cashmoney007, 27 septembre 2012 - 07:43 .

[Seival]

Gogzilla wrote...

 Whenever i get bored enough to come back to these forums,
I can only roll my eyes as i read one forum thread after the other.

Most of the threads barely consider any perspective other then their own, and as a result there is this illusionary consensus that certain opinnions are facts. Particularly the one regarding the Catalyst logic not making any sence.

I have long ago stopped arguing about the endings in such threads, but most places of ME discourse are filled with dicussions about the topic at hand.

Personally part of me is afraid Bioware may actually listen to this mob and take steps backwards, in the kind of games they deliver. 
 I would be lying if i said i was never dissapointed with Bioware's games. But despite certain failures in execution and 
rather than delivering yet another Lord of the rings or Star wars esqe story, they are choosing to tell a differnt kind of story in their games and i can appriciate that.

So what do the rest of you feel about the continuing negativity ?

Do you think its a sign that Bioware may be better off giving us a more tradational Hero's Journey, or should the rest of us (Clearly the minortiy on these forums atleast) Be more vocal or supportive of Bioware  in the face of all this negativity.

Don't worry. BioWare already proved they care about the ideas more than about the money. They did great job. And we should support them, so they will make more games like ME Trilogy.

Personally, I got tired of silly holywoodish stories. They are all the same, and completely boring. I want only really good, deep, philosophical, and instructive stories. And it looks like BioWare and Eidos are the only devs who can please me...

...Interesting thing. Both top devs are located in Canada

Modifié par Seival, 27 septembre 2012 - 08:06 .

[Podge 90]

You should read more if you think Control is deep and philosophical.

Gamers nowadays.

[Seival]

Podge 90 wrote...

You should read more if you think Control is deep and philosophical.

Gamers nowadays.

The entire ending concept is deep and philosophical. Including Control. All you need is to analize the endings. It's not that hard. But somehow, some players refuse to do so. I'm glad those are just minority. And I'll be really pleased if this minority will stop being too vocal.

[AresKeith]

Seival wrote...

Podge 90 wrote...

You should read more if you think Control is deep and philosophical.

Gamers nowadays.

The entire ending concept is deep and philosophical. Including Control. All you need is to analize the endings. It's not that hard. But somehow, some players refuse to do so. I'm glad those are just minority. And I'll be really pleased if this minority will stop being too vocal.

maybe you should go bump your threads somemore if your tired of us posting here

[Seival]

AresKeith wrote...

Seival wrote...

Podge 90 wrote...

You should read more if you think Control is deep and philosophical.

Gamers nowadays.

The entire ending concept is deep and philosophical. Including Control. All you need is to analize the endings. It's not that hard. But somehow, some players refuse to do so. I'm glad those are just minority. And I'll be really pleased if this minority will stop being too vocal.

maybe you should go bump your threads somemore if your tired of us posting here

Supporting BioWare is not something I can get tired of

[AresKeith]

Seival wrote...

AresKeith wrote...

Seival wrote...

Podge 90 wrote...

You should read more if you think Control is deep and philosophical.

Gamers nowadays.

The entire ending concept is deep and philosophical. Including Control. All you need is to analize the endings. It's not that hard. But somehow, some players refuse to do so. I'm glad those are just minority. And I'll be really pleased if this minority will stop being too vocal.

maybe you should go bump your threads somemore if your tired of us posting here

Supporting BioWare is not something I can get tired of

I didn't tell you to leave the forums, unlike you. See the difference

[Seival]

AresKeith wrote...

Seival wrote...

AresKeith wrote...

Seival wrote...

Podge 90 wrote...

You should read more if you think Control is deep and philosophical.

Gamers nowadays.

The entire ending concept is deep and philosophical. Including Control. All you need is to analize the endings. It's not that hard. But somehow, some players refuse to do so. I'm glad those are just minority. And I'll be really pleased if this minority will stop being too vocal.

maybe you should go bump your threads somemore if your tired of us posting here

Supporting BioWare is not something I can get tired of

I didn't tell you to leave the forums, unlike you. See the difference

I only asked to leave the ones who still act like retakers or other type of trolls/haters. Because hate is counter-productive.

[CaIIisto]

Ongoing negativity isn't surprising. Not everyone played the game upon release. You'll still have people playing it through for the first time now, and given the ratio of people that weren't happy with the original endings, and still aren't happy with the EC endings, then you're going to have people complaining for a while. Their opinions deserve to be heard, and they shouldn't be penalized for not playing the game until now.

[Dragoonlordz]

AresKeith wrote...

Seival wrote...

Supporting BioWare is not something I can get tired of

I didn't tell you to leave the forums, unlike you. See the difference

I guess you forgot you did tell someone else to leave not long ago...

AresKeith wrote...

Blueprotoss wrote...

-snip-

you should practice what you preach and move on and leave

Modifié par Dragoonlordz, 27 septembre 2012 - 09:13 .

[Cashmoney007]

Bioware should have just ran with the indoctrination theory. Who says that fans that didn't like the ending just wanted a happy ending? If fans want a happy ending then why can't that be one of their choices? People actually got deep thought from this game? It will be interesting to see how much the game will change after all the DLC comes out for ME3. A lot of people that didn't like the game for whatever reason might change their opinion.

Modifié par Cashmoney007, 27 septembre 2012 - 09:19 .

[AresKeith]

Dragoonlordz wrote...

AresKeith wrote...

Seival wrote...

Supporting BioWare is not something I can get tired of

I didn't tell you to leave the forums, unlike you. See the difference

I guess you forgot you did tell someone else to leave not long ago...

AresKeith wrote...

Blueprotoss wrote...

-snip-

you should practice what you preach and move on and leave

funny how you snipped his comment telling people to leave and I used his own comment against him. Man, that's nice of you

Modifié par AresKeith, 27 septembre 2012 - 09:16 .

[Dragoonlordz]

AresKeith wrote...

funny how you snipped his comment telling people to leave and I used his own comment against him. Man, that's nice of you

The comment I snipped was not telling people to leave, you may have replied in response to something he said some other time but his actual comment I snipped that you replied to was...

"Yet its supposedly "removed" content from ME2 from a Bioware writer.  Its time to move on with this dead horse."

Of which he was referring to dropping the topic, not leaving the forum.

My point being you cannot bash someone for doing something you have done yourself.

Modifié par Dragoonlordz, 27 septembre 2012 - 09:34 .

[Dragoonlordz]

Cashmoney007 wrote...

Bioware should have just ran with the indoctrination theory. Who says that fans that didn't like the ending just wanted a happy ending? If fans want a happy ending then why can't that be one of their choices? People actually got deep thought from this game? It will be interesting to see how much the game will change after all the DLC comes out for ME3. A lot of people that didn't like the game for whatever reason might change their opinion.

Once again IT is not an ending. It does not fix the ending, it does not even have an ending using IT. It just makes a giant black hole with no plot or gameplay to follow because no ending was created with IT preceding such.

[AresKeith]

Dragoonlordz wrote...

AresKeith wrote...

funny how you snipped his comment telling people to leave and I used his own comment against him. Man, that's nice of you

The comment I snipped was not telling people to leave, you may have replied in response to something he said some other time but his actual comment I snipped that you replied to was...

"Yet its supposedly "removed" content from ME2 from a Bioware writer.  Its time to move on with this dead horse."

Of which he was referring to dropping the topic, not leaving the forum.

My point being you cannot bash someone for doing something you have done yourself.

hmmm and you just assume I mean leave the forum instead of thread