689 réponses à ce sujet

[Snypy]

The Spamming Troll wrote...

Snypy wrote...

Harbinger is a hybrid. I don't think it can really love or hate. It's controlled by the Catalyst, after all. But to address your point, a Reaper can't take out the Normandy with a single shot--particularly not if the ship is upgraded with the heavy armor and the cyclonic barrier technology. Harbinger would need to fire several times to shoot the Normandy down. And by that time, numerous marines would've made to the Citadel. Those marines would open up the arms and the Crucible would dock comfortably. So, you can see that Harbinger can't risk it. That's why it doesn't focus on the Normandy but on the people running towards the Conduit.

ah, more headcanon to follow along with.

my headcanon says harbinger isnt a moron, and durring the beam run the normandy and its surrounding vascinity should be nothing but ash.

you act as if harbinger didnt spend all of ME2 harrassing and chassing down shepard and the normandy. only to have it become a sitting duck durring harbingers glorry hour of destruction and harbinger says "meh, ill just kill armyguy #37 instead."

come on guy, i know bioware put alot of dumb into ME3, dont try to add more to it.

Apparently, not everyone/everything is driven by pure emotions instead of reason, although I feel you might be too foolish to understand that.

[The Spamming Troll]

Finn the Jakey wrote...

On the Beam Run sequence,
Why would Harbinger risk taking time to shoot down the Normandy, which is waking people AWAY from the battle, when letting just one single soldier get onto the Citadel could mean the end of the Reapers?

if the beam is so important why is only harbinger there to protect it?

why does shepards EMS score define harbingers ineptitude?

[Snypy]

The Spamming Troll wrote...

Snypy wrote...

The Spamming Troll wrote...

Snypy wrote...

The Spamming Troll wrote...

Snypy wrote...

...

As for the run towards the Conduit, I think it's quite logical now. The Normandy isn't really teleporting. You don't know where it was before. Perhaps it was just hovering above the FOB (maybe waiting to pick-up someone). It could've been under fire from ground forces. Additionally, Harbinger cannot risk firing at the Normandy when it comes to pick-up squadmates. The Reaper needs to make sure that no-one gets onto the Citadel. Therefore, the Normandy is a low priority target.

what your writing is BS, you do realize that right? you making up abstrct thought about whay something that doesnt make sense, might make sense.

harbinger is no fool. he knows exactly who shepard is and what the normandy is. if bioware had talent, foresight, good writers, wed never have to make up reasons why harbinger, didnt kill shepard and blow the normandy to hell durring the beam run.

i mean seriously, your throwing out half assed excuses for a half assed ending. the bad thing is that its EASY for you to do it. youd prolly stick our dick in anything bioware sold.

Heh, go to hell. Read my previous messages in this thread. I'm in no way trying to justify the ending. I'm just saying that this one particular scene isn't necessarily illogical.

why am i supposed to go to hell?

i wasnt talking about the ending either. just that one scene.

sorry if your headcanon isnt an acceptable reason for me.

Are you sure you weren't talking about the ending? 

"i mean seriously, your throwing out half assed excuses for a half assed ending."

And this is the reason why I said you should go to hell:

"he bad thing is that its EASY for you to do it. youd prolly stick our dick in anything bioware sold."

You should do yourself a favour and always read what you wrote in your previous messages before responding to someone's comment.

ok you got me. i said the rod "ending" when i was talking about one specific scene in the ending. lets not argue about symantics. you know exactly what i mean. dont act naive about knowing exactly what im talking about and what i mean.

you know the other side of it. you know what my point it. its the exact reason your trying to convince yourself otherwise.

also, sorry i talked about your dick.

My assertion is at least logical whereas you're obviously unable to come up with any reasonable explanation whatsoever.

[Maxster_]

Oxtail Soup wrote...

Hm. If it improves morale, behold the following:

http://robertsspacei...m/star-citizen/

Fingers crossed this gets completed and released...

That's... interesting. I think i know now, where my saved from EAWare money will go.
Thanks.

[Maxster_]

Finn the Jakey wrote...

On the Beam Run sequence,
Why would Harbinger risk taking time to shoot down the Normandy, which is waking people AWAY from the battle, when letting just one single soldier get onto the Citadel could mean the end of the Reapers?

Harbringer reading minds.
Harbringer forgets about his main gun.
Reapers forget that they can turn off the beam. Well, they turned it off in cutscenes, but who cares.

[The Spamming Troll]

Snypy wrote...

Apparently, not everyone/everything is driven by pure emotions instead of reason, although I feel you might be too foolish to understand that.

other then calling me a moron, what are you saying here?

[Maxster_]

The Spamming Troll wrote...

Finn the Jakey wrote...

On the Beam Run sequence,
Why would Harbinger risk taking time to shoot down the Normandy, which is waking people AWAY from the battle, when letting just one single soldier get onto the Citadel could mean the end of the Reapers?

if the beam is so important why is only harbinger there to protect it?

why does shepards EMS score define harbingers ineptitude?

You seek logic and plausibility in ME3.
And that is your mistake

Well, they could just turn off the beam, or Harbringer could just annihilate everyone.
But they get hit with Mass Retardation Syndrome.

[The Spamming Troll]

Snypy wrote...
My assertion is at least logical whereas you're obviously unable to come up with any reasonable explanation whatsoever.

every response ive made to you is telling why your not using logic!

how about you write down everything about why you think that scene makes sense, and ill post a response rebuttleing everything youve just said.

itll be easy.

Modifié par The Spamming Troll, 10 octobre 2012 - 05:36 .

[Maxster_]

Snypy wrote...

The Spamming Troll wrote...

Snypy wrote...

The Spamming Troll wrote...

Snypy wrote...

The Spamming Troll wrote...

Snypy wrote...

...

As for the run towards the Conduit, I think it's quite logical now. The Normandy isn't really teleporting. You don't know where it was before. Perhaps it was just hovering above the FOB (maybe waiting to pick-up someone). It could've been under fire from ground forces. Additionally, Harbinger cannot risk firing at the Normandy when it comes to pick-up squadmates. The Reaper needs to make sure that no-one gets onto the Citadel. Therefore, the Normandy is a low priority target.

what your writing is BS, you do realize that right? you making up abstrct thought about whay something that doesnt make sense, might make sense.

harbinger is no fool. he knows exactly who shepard is and what the normandy is. if bioware had talent, foresight, good writers, wed never have to make up reasons why harbinger, didnt kill shepard and blow the normandy to hell durring the beam run.

i mean seriously, your throwing out half assed excuses for a half assed ending. the bad thing is that its EASY for you to do it. youd prolly stick our dick in anything bioware sold.

Heh, go to hell. Read my previous messages in this thread. I'm in no way trying to justify the ending. I'm just saying that this one particular scene isn't necessarily illogical.

why am i supposed to go to hell?

i wasnt talking about the ending either. just that one scene.

sorry if your headcanon isnt an acceptable reason for me.

Are you sure you weren't talking about the ending? 

"i mean seriously, your throwing out half assed excuses for a half assed ending."

And this is the reason why I said you should go to hell:

"he bad thing is that its EASY for you to do it. youd prolly stick our dick in anything bioware sold."

You should do yourself a favour and always read what you wrote in your previous messages before responding to someone's comment.

ok you got me. i said the rod "ending" when i was talking about one specific scene in the ending. lets not argue about symantics. you know exactly what i mean. dont act naive about knowing exactly what im talking about and what i mean.

you know the other side of it. you know what my point it. its the exact reason your trying to convince yourself otherwise.

also, sorry i talked about your dick.

My assertion is at least logical whereas you're obviously unable to come up with any reasonable explanation whatsoever.

Your assertion as logical as Catalyst's nonsensical mumbling. Assertion about retarded ground assault, and even more retarded beam run, i meant.

[Blueprotoss]

arial wrote...

 The real reason the ending(s) were poorly recieved is quite simple.

since the day ME3 was anounced, people started speculating on what features it would have, how the story would progress, etc.

It came to the state where No game could realisticly match what fans expected.

When the game finally came out, and it could not live up to what people were sure it would be, people looked for every possible reason to blame for their dissatisfaction.

This is very true and this small outrage is the norm with trilogies.  A similar scenario that happened this year was with the Dark Knighht Rises.  This also somewhat happened to Promtheus because some expected way too much with the xenomorph involvement.

Maxster_ wrote...

You seek logic and plausibility in ME3.
And that is your mistake [smilie]http://social.bioware.com/images/forum/emoticons/wizard.png[/smilie]

Well, they could just turn off the beam, or Harbringer could just annihilate everyone.
But they get hit with Mass Retardation Syndrome.

To be fair overanalyzing isn't needed especially when you ME1 and ME2 would need to be questioned along with ME3 whether or not hindsight is used.

Modifié par Blueprotoss, 10 octobre 2012 - 05:38 .

[Snypy]

The Spamming Troll wrote...

Finn the Jakey wrote...

On the Beam Run sequence,
Why would Harbinger risk taking time to shoot down the Normandy, which is waking people AWAY from the battle, when letting just one single soldier get onto the Citadel could mean the end of the Reapers?

if the beam is so important why is only harbinger there to protect it?

why does shepards EMS score define harbingers ineptitude?

One explanation could be that the EMS score represents the strenght of the Allied forces and therefore (partially) the number of soldiers running towards the Conduit in the scene. And as the number of targets increases, Harbinger's accuracy is obviously reduced, because it needs to shoot more frequently to take out more people. But that's just a theory. One which you'll call "headcanon" nonetheless.

[Blueprotoss]

The Spamming Troll wrote...

Snypy wrote...

Apparently, not everyone/everything is driven by pure emotions instead of reason, although I feel you might be too foolish to understand that.

other then calling me a moron, what are you saying here?

Ad hominems aren't needed even when Synpy didn't use one.

Modifié par Blueprotoss, 10 octobre 2012 - 05:36 .

[Maxster_]

Snypy wrote...

The Spamming Troll wrote...

Finn the Jakey wrote...

On the Beam Run sequence,
Why would Harbinger risk taking time to shoot down the Normandy, which is waking people AWAY from the battle, when letting just one single soldier get onto the Citadel could mean the end of the Reapers?

if the beam is so important why is only harbinger there to protect it?

why does shepards EMS score define harbingers ineptitude?

One explanation could be that the EMS score represents the strenght of the Allied forces and therefore (partially) the number of soldiers running towards the Conduit in the scene. And as the number of targets increases, Harbinger's accuracy is obviously reduced, because it needs to shoot more frequently to take out more people. But that's just a theory. One which you'll call "headcanon" nonetheless.

And yet another laughable assertion.
Harbringer could one-shot entire offensive, why he even cares about individual soldiers?
It is nonsense.

[Snypy]

The Spamming Troll wrote...

Snypy wrote...

Apparently, not everyone/everything is driven by pure emotions instead of reason, although I feel you might be too foolish to understand that.

other then calling me a moron, what are you saying here?

"you act as if harbinger didnt spend all of ME2 harrassing and chassing down shepard and the normandy. only to have it become a sitting duck durring harbingers glorry hour of destruction and harbinger says "meh, ill just kill armyguy #37 instead.""

You're implying that Harbinger should be driven by emotions--and therefore shoot the Normandy down--instead of logic, i.e. make sure no-one gets to the Citadel. The Reaper couldn't probably care less about a single ship retreating from the battlefield

Modifié par Snypy, 10 octobre 2012 - 05:40 .

[Blueprotoss]

Maxster_ wrote...

And yet another laughable assertion.
Harbringer could one-shot entire offensive, why he even cares about individual soldiers?
It is nonsense.

Shepard did take out the Human Capital ship in ME2 and did heavily help out in the defeat of Sovreign in ME1.  Harbinger didn't randomly notice that Humanity is the threat in this cycle.

Modifié par Blueprotoss, 10 octobre 2012 - 05:42 .

[Maxster_]

Blueprotoss wrote...

Maxster_ wrote...

And yet another laughable assertion.
Harbringer could one-shot entire offensive, why he even cares about individual soldiers?
It is nonsense.

Shepard did take out the Human Capital ship in ME2 and did heavily help out in the defeat of Sovreign in ME1.

That is something close to Harbringer main gun.

400kt explosion.

Now tell me, why he just not destroyed that offensive instantly.

Modifié par Maxster_, 10 octobre 2012 - 05:49 .

[Blueprotoss]

Maxster_ wrote...

Blueprotoss wrote...

Maxster_ wrote...

And yet another laughable assertion.
Harbringer could one-shot entire offensive, why he even cares about individual soldiers?
It is nonsense.

Shepard did take out the Human Capital ship in ME2 and did heavily help out in the defeat of Sovreign in ME1.

That is something close to Harbringer main gun.

400kt explosion.

Now tell me, why he just not destroyed that offensive instantly.

This is a great example of a strawman even when nukes are far from useful against the Reapers even for the EMP effect because of their kinetic barriers.  Btw you didn't edit anything.

Modifié par Blueprotoss, 10 octobre 2012 - 05:51 .

[Maxster_]

Blueprotoss wrote...

Maxster_ wrote...

Blueprotoss wrote...

Maxster_ wrote...

And yet another laughable assertion.
Harbringer could one-shot entire offensive, why he even cares about individual soldiers?
It is nonsense.

Shepard did take out the Human Capital ship in ME2 and did heavily help out in the defeat of Sovreign in ME1.

That is something close to Harbringer main gun.

400kt explosion.

Nukes are far from useful against the Reapers even for the EMP effect because of their kinetic barriers.  Btw you didn't edit anything.

Maxster_ wrote...

Now tell me, why he just not destroyed that offensive instantly.

This is a great example of a strawman.

First, there was bug with my link.
That is close to the power of the main gun of reaper dreadnought. If you don't know that from the lore - it is your problem.

[The Spamming Troll]

Snypy wrote...

The Spamming Troll wrote...

Snypy wrote...

Apparently, not everyone/everything is driven by pure emotions instead of reason, although I feel you might be too foolish to understand that.

other then calling me a moron, what are you saying here?

"you act as if harbinger didnt spend all of ME2 harrassing and chassing down shepard and the normandy. only to have it become a sitting duck durring harbingers glorry hour of destruction and harbinger says "meh, ill just kill armyguy #37 instead.""

You're implying that Harbinger should be driven by emotions--and therefore shoot the Normandy down--instead of logic, i.e. make sure no-one gets to the Citadel. The Reaper couldn't probably care less about a single ship retreating from the battlefield

thats all fine and dandy, untill you ask yourself why was harbinger the only one protectiong the beam? how does harbinger know the best ship in the galaxy is only droppin in to pick up two wonded soldiers? what if the normandy was there to bomb the **** out of harbinger?

its a complete circle of retardedness. you cant say this makes sense bassing that off of that other thing that doesnt make sense.

Modifié par The Spamming Troll, 10 octobre 2012 - 05:56 .

[Snypy]

Maxster_ wrote...

Blueprotoss wrote...

Maxster_ wrote...

And yet another laughable assertion.
Harbringer could one-shot entire offensive, why he even cares about individual soldiers?
It is nonsense.

Shepard did take out the Human Capital ship in ME2 and did heavily help out in the defeat of Sovreign in ME1.

That is something close to Harbringer main gun.

400kt explosion.

I reckon Harbinger doesn't want the Conduit destroyed as well.

Additionally, do you remember the fight on Tuchanka, or better--on Rannoch where Shepard was dodging the Reaper destroyer? Why didn't it simply use its main gun to wipe out the entire area? Well, perhaps the main gun has some limitations when fighting ground battles.

[Blueprotoss]

Maxster_ wrote...

First, there was bug with my link.
That is close to the power of the main gun of reaper dreadnought. If you don't know that from the lore - it is your problem.

There was no link when you mentioned an edit and showing a nuke isn't a "test" of the power that Reapers have.

Snypy wrote...

I reckon Harbinger doesn't want the Conduit destroyed as well. 

Additionally, do you remember the fight on Tuchanka, or better--on Rannoch where Shepard was dodging the Reaper destroyer? Why didn't it simply use its main gun to wipe out the entire area? Well, perhaps the main gun has some limitations when fighting ground battles.

Everything has limitations and maybe its a friendly fire issue.

Modifié par Blueprotoss, 10 octobre 2012 - 05:58 .

[Blueprotoss]

The Spamming Troll wrote...

Snypy wrote...

The Spamming Troll wrote...

Snypy wrote...

Apparently, not everyone/everything is driven by pure emotions instead of reason, although I feel you might be too foolish to understand that.

other then calling me a moron, what are you saying here?

"you act as if harbinger didnt spend all of ME2 harrassing and chassing down shepard and the normandy. only to have it become a sitting duck durring harbingers glorry hour of destruction and harbinger says "meh, ill just kill armyguy #37 instead.""

You're implying that Harbinger should be driven by emotions--and therefore shoot the Normandy down--instead of logic, i.e. make sure no-one gets to the Citadel. The Reaper couldn't probably care less about a single ship retreating from the battlefield

thats all fine and dandy, untill you ask yourself why was harbinger the only one protectiong the beam? how does harbinger know the best ship in the galaxy is only droppin in to pick up two wonded soldiers? what if the normandy was there to bomb the **** out of harbinger?

its a complete circle of retardedness. you cant say this makes sense bassing that off of that other then that doesnt make sense.

Ad hominems still won't work and you don't need to completely understand something for it to make sense.

[Maxster_]

Snypy wrote...

Maxster_ wrote...

Blueprotoss wrote...

Maxster_ wrote...

And yet another laughable assertion.
Harbringer could one-shot entire offensive, why he even cares about individual soldiers?
It is nonsense.

Shepard did take out the Human Capital ship in ME2 and did heavily help out in the defeat of Sovreign in ME1.

That is something close to Harbringer main gun.

400kt explosion.

I reckon Harbinger doesn't want the Conduit destroyed as well.

Additionally, do you remember the fight on Tuchanka, or better--on Rannoch where Shepard was dodging the Reaper destroyer? Why didn't it simply use its main gun to wipe out the entire area? Well, perhaps the main gun has some limitations when fighting ground battles.

Yeah yeah, "perhaps", "dodging the reaper".
You forgot to add that entire quarian fleet, that could obliterate everything in 50km giving they trained targeting, shooting at Shepard.
As i said, everyone involved in ME3 main plot becomes completely retarded.

It is gun used to bombard planets from orbit, and destroy ships from 1-2 shots. It is just another lore butchering and shoehorning that ME3 consists of.

Modifié par Maxster_, 10 octobre 2012 - 05:57 .

[Maxster_]

As for conduit - it is out of the lore, another asspull, and - generated by citadel.
Also, reapers could just turn the thing off from the start of ground offensive, which(ground offensive), btw, caused Harbringer descend.

Modifié par Maxster_, 10 octobre 2012 - 06:00 .

[The Spamming Troll]

Blueprotoss wrote...

Ad hominems still won't work and you don't need to completely understand something for it to make sense.

you seem to rely on that word quite a bit.