451 réponses à ce sujet

[dreman9999]

Maxster_ wrote...

dreman9999 wrote...

tvman099 wrote...

If by conventional you mean no space magic or similar contrivance, then yes. Sovereign made it quite clear in ME1 that the galaxy's fleets in their current state were pretty pitiful next to the Reapers. I had originally figured that perhaps the key to defeating them would lie in discovering information about their origins and creation. Even the concept of a crucible-like device as a means to victory isn't a bad idea if integrated into the plot rather than pulled out of nowhere 15 minutes into the final act. Something extra was needed for victory.

THis basicly coming down to "I don't like the catalyst".

And now everyone obliged to like that retarded entity, which mere existence retconned ME1 into oblivion?

It did not retcom ME1....iN FACT me1 explains why the catalyst does not have control over the citadel...
The catalyst states the citadel is part of him. But he has no dirct control over the citadel.

[CmdrShep80]

Has anyone wondered why the galaxy at war says something like the alliance is winning in key areas and holding steady when the reapers are basically everywhere? Is it just Alliance Propaganda that everything's fine even though there's a ship crashing behind the person saying it?

[The Spamming Troll]

Massa FX wrote...

I didn't know what to expect other than beating down the Reapers and a showdown with Harbinger.

...

pretty much.

instead i fought cerberus and killed TIM.

[SpamBot2000]

dreman9999 wrote...

SpamBot2000 wrote...

I did expect it, yes. I still do.

All the 'realist' objections are frankly missing the point.

What in the series points to the being possible?

See 'Mass Effect' and 'Mass Effect 2', by BioWare.

Modifié par SpamBot2000, 04 octobre 2012 - 05:43 .

[moater boat]

I was expecting a unified galaxy to be major part of it, but I was also, foolishly it would seem, expecting past decisions to come in to play. For example, I thought my decisions on the rachni, the council, and the collector base, along with the dozens of other smaller decisions I made, would somehow actually effect the chances of achieving victory. Of course we now all know that none of that really mattered.

[moater boat]

dreman9999 wrote...


It's not because of what Hackett said. It's because in the end of ME1 we saw a reaper lose to fleet and were told a massive fleet of unknown size is coming. 

fixed it for you you.

[palician]

Robhuzz wrote...

After ME1 I didn't know what to expect. I figured the Reapers would be explained a bit in ME2 and we'd find some weakness to exploit.

After ME2 I thought ME3 would probably not start with an invasion since we still didn't have any clue on how to fight them.

When the first ME3 trailer showed the Reapers attacking Earth and beating the pulp out of everyone and everything right in the beginning with no clue as to how to fight them, I knew we were most likely in for a deus ex machina. I hate it when I'm right sometimes...

Though I expected a deus ex machina by then I held hope that it would not simply be a Reaper off button - I really thought the ME team was more talented than that - but sadly it wasn't to be.

This

[nopantsisabela]

dreman9999 wrote...

1.This screams "can be beat conventionally"?

*snip scary Reaper pic*

2. Not one racein ME preped for them...Not one....Out side of the geth.
On top of that they vastly out number us.If you think you can beat the convetionally After ME1 and 2...Your dreaming.

OP here: So I just wanted to address this since you took the time to provide a frightening Reaper fleet picture. After ME1 and ME2, I did actually feel like we could beat that. This feeling was somewhat supported by the numerous times that Shepard was able to do amazing, seemingly impossible things (like face off a Reaper on foot, cure a genophage, die... but get better, secure peace in the Middle East resolve the Geth/Quarian conflict, etc). So even though I played ME3 half terrified that we were going to lose and Earth was going to get blown up, I certainly held out a substantial amount of hope that we could win, and win conventionally.

When I say "conventionally" I don't mean I expected us good guys to be able to go punch a Reaper to death, figuratively speaking. I expected a conventional victory to be hard fought, probably won by the skin of our teeth (in the "best" ending), and to follow the previously established rules of the series. This does not necessarily preclude the idea of a Crucible-type weapon, or some other last minute twist that helps you to win, so long as such things are explained logically within the story parameters and foreshadowed appropriately.

But yeah, scary as the Reapers are, I did not expect the only way for us to win to utilize an 11th-hour omniscient and omnipotent character that pretty much takes all responsiblility for the victory out of your hands. And I'll blame being gobsmacked by that sudden twist on BioWare's previously awesome writing skills, which had never before utilized such juvenile and poorly implemented plot devices. 

Modifié par nopantsisabela, 04 octobre 2012 - 06:29 .

[Merlin 47]

The answer to the OP's question is yes - I did expect a conventional ending.

[acidic-ph0]

Mastone wrote...

To the Op;

yes I expected a conventional ending, because ME was a scifi war story.
With a conventional ending I don't necesarrilly mean an ending where we all work together, but one where your choices ( albeit slightly) affected the outcome of the war and not some confetti explosion which rendered all choices pointless..... I hope they put the writer of his story arc back to school so he can develop his skills a bit more because this was 3rd grade level

Yeah I agree with your post entirely. Mass Effect follows the same sort of sci-fi techy style that is most commonly seen in  a show like Star Trek (something like the Dominion War maybe). A seemingly hopeless battle that truly felt as if heavy casualties were endured and that lives across the galaxy would be affected for better or worse.

What we got instead was pure garbage with a literal deus ex machina ending. Hell people constantly whine at anyone who wants a conventional victory, saying that such a thing would be a "rainbows and unicorns" ending, but in reality that Disney-esque ending people complain about is actually what Bioware gave us with Sythesis and Control! Anyone who cant see how sugar-coated and sappy those two endings are should have their eyes examined. Just as Bill Casey said earlier, what synthesis (and control) shows us is more similar to something you would see in a carebears episode than anything a conventional victory would show.

I was expecting it to end much like the suicide mission from ME2 but more complex and with greater galactic impact. Squadmates would be vulnerable as well as entire fleets... and maybe even planets. I half expected to sacrifice Earth in some way to defeat the Reapers and bring about galactic peace.

So yes OP I too wanted to win... to face an ultimate challenge and in the end feel like we beat it. That is, after all, how the other games ended, and how they were all paced too. Instead, after all that buildup, we just... acquiesced to the limited conditions that the Reapers' boss gave us... Hooray <_<

[drayfish]

dreman9999 wrote...

Xerxes52 wrote...

I did OP. The Reaper's MO was divide and conquer. Paralyze all traffic and communication via the Citadel, then harvest the galaxy piecemeal. That was their main advantage, and it was logical to think that the Reaper's did so because they didn't have the capacity to take on a united galaxy.

ME1 and ME2 definitely felt like they were leading to a DA:O in space (which would have been awesome).

Do you know that DA:O was also an unconventional victory?

Probably not the best example to use to for your argument since DA:O did indeed allow the player to have a genuine impact upon the ending, and to express their morality in a dire situation: you could choose whether to die a hero or possibly condemn civilisation; could select whether to screw over your friends or pay the ultimate price yourself; and you get to kill your enemy rather than embrace their beliefs.

Mass Effect, in contrast, lets you agree with the Cataylst's racist premise (which insults the very unified galaxy your gathered together to fight him) and allows you to press one of three arbitrary magic buttons that that grant you a wish with a terrible price...

There was more going on in DA:O than Eugenic Pick-A-Box.

[inversevideo]

acidic-ph0 wrote...

Mastone wrote...

To the Op;

yes I expected a conventional ending, because ME was a scifi war story.
With a conventional ending I don't necesarrilly mean an ending where we all work together, but one where your choices ( albeit slightly) affected the outcome of the war and not some confetti explosion which rendered all choices pointless..... I hope they put the writer of his story arc back to school so he can develop his skills a bit more because this was 3rd grade level

Yeah I agree with your post entirely. Mass Effect follows the same sort of sci-fi techy style that is most commonly seen in  a show like Star Trek (something like the Dominion War maybe). A seemingly hopeless battle that truly felt as if heavy casualties were endured and that lives across the galaxy would be affected for better or worse.

What we got instead was pure garbage with a literal deus ex machina ending. Hell people constantly whine at anyone who wants a conventional victory, saying that such a thing would be a "rainbows and unicorns" ending, but in reality that Disney-esque ending people complain about is actually what Bioware gave us with Sythesis and Control! Anyone who cant see how sugar-coated and sappy those two endings are should have their eyes examined. Just as Bill Casey said earlier, what synthesis (and control) shows us is more similar to something you would see in a carebears episode than anything a conventional victory would show.

I was expecting it to end much like the suicide mission from ME2 but more complex and with greater galactic impact. Squadmates would be vulnerable as well as entire fleets... and maybe even planets. I half expected to sacrifice Earth in some way to defeat the Reapers and bring about galactic peace.

So yes OP I too wanted to win... to face an ultimate challenge and in the end feel like we beat it. That is, after all, how the other games ended, and how they were all paced too. Instead, after all that buildup, we just... acquiesced to the limited conditions that the Reapers' boss gave us... Hooray <_<

+1

[GarvakD]

No, I didn't expect a conventional victory. I expected the war and ME3 to be gruesome and depressing. But I also expected something better/more optimistic.

Modifié par GarvakD, 04 octobre 2012 - 06:44 .

[tvman099]

dreman9999 wrote...

tvman099 wrote...

If by conventional you mean no space magic or similar contrivance, then yes. Sovereign made it quite clear in ME1 that the galaxy's fleets in their current state were pretty pitiful next to the Reapers. I had originally figured that perhaps the key to defeating them would lie in discovering information about their origins and creation. Even the concept of a crucible-like device as a means to victory isn't a bad idea if integrated into the plot rather than pulled out of nowhere 15 minutes into the final act. Something extra was needed for victory.

THis basicly coming down to "I don't like the catalyst".

Disliking the Catalyst is a side effect of having functioning brain cells and a preference for good writing, yes.

Modifié par tvman099, 04 octobre 2012 - 06:50 .

[GarvakD]

acidic-ph0 wrote...

Mastone wrote...

To the Op;

yes I expected a conventional ending, because ME was a scifi war story.
With a conventional ending I don't necesarrilly mean an ending where we all work together, but one where your choices ( albeit slightly) affected the outcome of the war and not some confetti explosion which rendered all choices pointless..... I hope they put the writer of his story arc back to school so he can develop his skills a bit more because this was 3rd grade level

What we got instead was pure garbage with a literal deus ex machina ending. Hell people constantly whine at anyone who wants a conventional victory, saying that such a thing would be a "rainbows and unicorns" ending, but in reality that Disney-esque ending people complain about is actually what Bioware gave us with Sythesis and Control! Anyone who cant see how sugar-coated and sappy those two endings are should have their eyes examined. Just as Bill Casey said earlier, what synthesis (and control) shows us is more similar to something you would see in a carebears episode than anything a conventional victory would show.

No.  A deus ex machina ending would be some incredibly unexpected victory through conventional means.  Not destroy, not control, not synthesis.  

Modifié par GarvakD, 04 octobre 2012 - 06:50 .

[Baldrick67]

MyChemicalBromance wrote...

I actively hoped that wasn't going to be the case. That's a story that belongs in Care Bears; not Mass Effect.

To each their own opinion, but I was thrilled when this turned out to not be the case.

So the allies banding together in WW2 to defeat the Axis powers was ,,,, care bears ?

[tvman099]

GarvakD wrote...

acidic-ph0 wrote...

Mastone wrote...

To the Op;

yes I expected a conventional ending, because ME was a scifi war story.
With a conventional ending I don't necesarrilly mean an ending where we all work together, but one where your choices ( albeit slightly) affected the outcome of the war and not some confetti explosion which rendered all choices pointless..... I hope they put the writer of his story arc back to school so he can develop his skills a bit more because this was 3rd grade level

What we got instead was pure garbage with a literal deus ex machina ending. Hell people constantly whine at anyone who wants a conventional victory, saying that such a thing would be a "rainbows and unicorns" ending, but in reality that Disney-esque ending people complain about is actually what Bioware gave us with Sythesis and Control! Anyone who cant see how sugar-coated and sappy those two endings are should have their eyes examined. Just as Bill Casey said earlier, what synthesis (and control) shows us is more similar to something you would see in a carebears episode than anything a conventional victory would show.

No.  A deus ex machina ending would be some incredibly unexpected victory through conventional means.  Not destroy, not control, not synthesis.  

The definition of a deus ex machina is when an event or character comes out of nowhere offering the solution to a problem that is otherwise unsolvable. That's literally what the Catalyst is. The nature of the solution isn't the concern, it's how the solution comes about.

Modifié par tvman099, 04 octobre 2012 - 06:56 .

[Maxster_]

dreman9999 wrote...

Maxster_ wrote...

dreman9999 wrote...

tvman099 wrote...

If by conventional you mean no space magic or similar contrivance, then yes. Sovereign made it quite clear in ME1 that the galaxy's fleets in their current state were pretty pitiful next to the Reapers. I had originally figured that perhaps the key to defeating them would lie in discovering information about their origins and creation. Even the concept of a crucible-like device as a means to victory isn't a bad idea if integrated into the plot rather than pulled out of nowhere 15 minutes into the final act. Something extra was needed for victory.

THis basicly coming down to "I don't like the catalyst".

And now everyone obliged to like that retarded entity, which mere existence retconned ME1 into oblivion?

It did not retcom ME1....iN FACT me1 explains why the catalyst does not have control over the citadel...
The catalyst states the citadel is part of him. But he has no dirct control over the citadel.

LOL.
So, catalyst have control over the reapers, but doesn't have control over his body? You know, AI is not ethereal. Well, in sci-fi unverse at least.
So why exactly he didn't signal the reapers moment after he knew that keepers are not responding? Why he even had Sovereign as vanguard and Harbringer as backup when all he could just watch over the Citadel, and then signal keepers himself when the time is right?
He is retarded? He is deliberately restrains himself just for lulz? How does that correspond with his all-life goal?

[Bill Casey]

acidic-ph0 wrote...

but in reality that Disney-esque ending people complain about is actually what Bioware gave us with Sythesis and Control!

No, Disney is not that disturbed...
Disney films typically end with the villain dying, the guy getting the girl and some sort of musical dance party...

[mumba]

Hell no.

[acidic-ph0]

GarvakD wrote...

No.  A deus ex machina ending would be some incredibly unexpected victory through conventional means.  Not destroy, not control, not synthesis.  

I would disagree with that entirely. Conventional victory hasn't just been "forshadowed" it's how you've beaten the enemy EVERY time through all of ME1 and 2 and 90% of ME3 (collecting countless war assets, take back earth advertising campaign...etc). With guns, brains and determination Shepherd and his allies have done the impossible many times and we've always felt like accomplished badasses when we won. After curing the genophage, bringing peace to the Quarians and Geth, defeating Saren, Sovereign, and the collectors while still keeping all squadmates alive, and uniting an entire galaxy against a common enemy all on our own, I think its safe to say that we as an audience and as participants expected a victory along these lines. It would be hard fought, brutal and bloody, but it would also be well deserved. What was not forshadowed at ALL in the previous games and only just very slightly hinted at in the 3rd game was the catalyst. And that being said, we only heard of the catalyst as a name of a "thing"  and not that it would actually be a sentient all-powerful AI character that would literaly shape the fate of the Galaxy in the last ten minutes of the game. 

 The spacebrat itself is in fact a literal deus ex machina. A godlike character that we have never seen before with little to no forshadowing, that appears in the climax of the story in order to change the fate of the entire world making all that has happened throughout the past 2.9 games relatively pointless. The protagonist and all his/her hardships are rendered ineffective in the longrun as the only options he/she has are the ones provided by the catalyst. 

Also, conventional victory is nearly implied in every "hero's journey" type of story because we want to see the hero succeed on his/her own terms without devine intervention. After all these tales are loved for their simplicity and are really some of the perfect types of plotlines to follow for an action game (or videogames in general).  

Ultimately what really matters is whether or not the main overarching conflicts of the past 3 games are resolved through the efforts of the protagonist and flow the internal consistancy of the entire ME universe. Conventional victory would accomplish that, and should be expected. The catalyst and it's illogical, and mystical "pick-a-color" options does not accomplish that goal.

tl;dr

Stories should be resolved internaly by staying consistent with their own internal logic. 

The catalyst does not follow the themes or internal logic of the previous ME games or 90% of ME3. And finally some sort of conventional victory has been used in ALL the previous games for conflict resolution, without any need for "space magic" to ever get involved, and should be expected as an appropriate ending.

[Sable Phoenix]

I actually expected an unconventional victory, but I frankly expected it to be set up before the Reapers even got into the galaxy. It was heavily implied that if the entire Reaper force actually made it inside the Milky Way, we were totally screwed, so we had to be ready before they got here. Sadly Mass Effect 2 threw that all out the window with the Lazarus Project and its fundamentally pointless Collector subplot, and, in my belief, pre-determined the ultimate failure of the storyline and its resolution.

What I expected was that Mass Effect 2 would be more exploration and politicking, both in finding the tools necessary to defeat the Reapers (like the Leviathan of Dys as one example... DLC that came a game late, in my opinion), as well as working through the myriad racial tensions and diplomatic pitfalls necessary to unite the galaxy. Then Mass Effect 3 would be us employing all of these things to stop the Reapers cold as soon as they got into the galaxy so that we would actually have a chance to fight back against them and eventually destroy them. I also expected the destruction or defeat of the Reapers to involve something other than military might, despite the work we had done on the conventional warfighting.

Actually, after Mass Effect 2, the only way I could see that the story would be redeemed was if Shepard was the Illusive Man's Trojan horse, meant to take over the Reapers, or at least a Reaper (presumably Harbinger), and defeat them from the inside. I expected the climactic showdown to be not a massive physical battle (although that was a given as the setpiece where it would take place), but inside the minds of Shepard and the Reapers. I figured that was the ultimate objective, narratively speaking, of the Lazarus Project... to convert Shepard into a hybrid lifeform, with enough of her now being synthetic that she could employ that unique stubbornness and determination to confront the Reapers on their home turf. The Reapers' shells may have been nearly invulnerable, but on the inside...

Sadly, we got nothing of the sort, and Mass Effect 2 was revealed to be almost completely pointless from a story perspective.  It's depressing, in hindsight, to realize that the stories of two entire games were destroyed in the opening twenty minutes of the first.

Modifié par Sable Phoenix, 04 octobre 2012 - 07:52 .

[dreman9999]

drayfish wrote...

dreman9999 wrote...

Xerxes52 wrote...

I did OP. The Reaper's MO was divide and conquer. Paralyze all traffic and communication via the Citadel, then harvest the galaxy piecemeal. That was their main advantage, and it was logical to think that the Reaper's did so because they didn't have the capacity to take on a united galaxy.

ME1 and ME2 definitely felt like they were leading to a DA:O in space (which would have been awesome).

Do you know that DA:O was also an unconventional victory?

Probably not the best example to use to for your argument since DA:O did indeed allow the player to have a genuine impact upon the ending, and to express their morality in a dire situation: you could choose whether to die a hero or possibly condemn civilisation; could select whether to screw over your friends or pay the ultimate price yourself; and you get to kill your enemy rather than embrace their beliefs.

Mass Effect, in contrast, lets you agree with the Cataylst's racist premise (which insults the very unified galaxy your gathered together to fight him) and allows you to press one of three arbitrary magic buttons that that grant you a wish with a terrible price...

There was more going on in DA:O than Eugenic Pick-A-Box.

That does not defer the fact that the end of DA:O was not a convention victory. You did not overwhelmed the dark spawn with you forces...You just killed the magic arch demaon with the magic graywarden.

You stating how they dealt with moral does not counter that.....Also, what destroy and control does is not dictated by the catalyst. Only synthesis. Your issue is with what ever race made the crucible with destroy and control.

[dreman9999]

Maxster_ wrote...

dreman9999 wrote...

Maxster_ wrote...

dreman9999 wrote...

tvman099 wrote...

If by conventional you mean no space magic or similar contrivance, then yes. Sovereign made it quite clear in ME1 that the galaxy's fleets in their current state were pretty pitiful next to the Reapers. I had originally figured that perhaps the key to defeating them would lie in discovering information about their origins and creation. Even the concept of a crucible-like device as a means to victory isn't a bad idea if integrated into the plot rather than pulled out of nowhere 15 minutes into the final act. Something extra was needed for victory.

THis basicly coming down to "I don't like the catalyst".

And now everyone obliged to like that retarded entity, which mere existence retconned ME1 into oblivion?

It did not retcom ME1....iN FACT me1 explains why the catalyst does not have control over the citadel...
The catalyst states the citadel is part of him. But he has no dirct control over the citadel.

LOL.
So, catalyst have control over the reapers, but doesn't have control over his body? You know, AI is not ethereal. Well, in sci-fi unverse at least.
So why exactly he didn't signal the reapers moment after he knew that keepers are not responding? Why he even had Sovereign as vanguard and Harbringer as backup when all he could just watch over the Citadel, and then signal keepers himself when the time is right?
He is retarded? He is deliberately restrains himself just for lulz? How does that correspond with his all-life goal?

1.The citadel is not his body. As he said it's part of him.
2. The catalyst does not directly control the reapers, he just make the programing they fallow and makes cahnges when needed.

3. He can't signal the keepers him self. He does not have direct access. The keepers are just fallowing a pre made program. It set up so organic don't find out the citadel is a trap via badkwards engineering. This has been stated form ME1.

[dreman9999]

tvman099 wrote...

GarvakD wrote...

acidic-ph0 wrote...

Mastone wrote...

To the Op;

yes I expected a conventional ending, because ME was a scifi war story.
With a conventional ending I don't necesarrilly mean an ending where we all work together, but one where your choices ( albeit slightly) affected the outcome of the war and not some confetti explosion which rendered all choices pointless..... I hope they put the writer of his story arc back to school so he can develop his skills a bit more because this was 3rd grade level

What we got instead was pure garbage with a literal deus ex machina ending. Hell people constantly whine at anyone who wants a conventional victory, saying that such a thing would be a "rainbows and unicorns" ending, but in reality that Disney-esque ending people complain about is actually what Bioware gave us with Sythesis and Control! Anyone who cant see how sugar-coated and sappy those two endings are should have their eyes examined. Just as Bill Casey said earlier, what synthesis (and control) shows us is more similar to something you would see in a carebears episode than anything a conventional victory would show.

No.  A deus ex machina ending would be some incredibly unexpected victory through conventional means.  Not destroy, not control, not synthesis.  

The definition of a deus ex machina is when an event or character comes out of nowhere offering the solution to a problem that is otherwise unsolvable. That's literally what the Catalyst is. The nature of the solution isn't the concern, it's how the solution comes about.

What does the catalyst solve? He adds more problems.