393 réponses à ce sujet

[Yesmar]

avenging_teabag wrote...

Yesmar wrote...

Maxster_ wrote...


1. ME3 is nonsensical plot-hole ridden mess long before the endings.
It is a fact.
Crucible, Cerberus becoming Sith Empire, Reapers sitting in dark space for thousands of years just for lulz - it is all nonsense, plot-holes. Theese completely destroys not only ME3 plot, but overarching plot of the series.
But it is irrelevant to ITers, because this crap writing makes IT existence impossible.
Therefore, it is ignored.

It's your opinion, don't mistake it for fact.
Nothing about it is "fact".

Logical and narrative inconsistencies - between ME3 and the earlier games, and within ME3 itself - permeat the ME3 so-called "plot" thoroughly starting from the very beginning. Dismissing them with "your opinion, LOL" doesn't make your position worth considering.

Nobody mentioned "logical and narrative inconsistencies".
The Crucible, Cerberus and the Reapers are not nonsensical, it is only your opinion they're.
And it is an opinion the writing is crap.

[Applepie_Svk]

Maxster_ wrote...

I meant if it would be EAWare plan. Like destroy their core fanbase, heavily damage their reputation - and all that to release real ending year later, for which no one will ever care.

As for now, - ITers is main source of income from DLC, and they will eat any crap EAWare serve them.
.

As far as I know EA don´t care about fans, they care only about money and deadlines - so as far as they have COD crowd they are fine. Look at Dead Space 3, they said that we know that fans are angry about multiplayer and we are sorry but this is the way that game must evolve so we are going to use MP anyway...

And about BioWare, we all know that ending itself is job of two guys which locked themselves alone in office and made their ending, even some of the writers were opposing to this idea but you know how it ends... ignored like Moriarty´s assertion that backlash of ME3 endings came from vocal minority...

I don´t think that ITers are main source of income, I know lots of them and they are disgusted from idea to pay more till they will see IT ending.

Maxster_ wrote...
You do not fix bad writing with bad writing.

Saying that Catalyst is only one problem of ME3 is a delusion. Saying ME3 was greatly written before the ending - is plain lie.

If IT is true than it´s also true that it was poorly executed that´s no doubt, but still I would swallow it if they made some free ending DLC which would be confirmation from BioWare.
And about second paragraph ? I never said that ME3 is marvelous, I was always saying that ME3 is filled with mediocre attempts to beat its predecessors

Modifié par Applepie_Svk, 21 novembre 2012 - 01:39 .

[avenging_teabag]

Yesmar wrote...

avenging_teabag wrote...

Yesmar wrote...

Maxster_ wrote...


1. ME3 is nonsensical plot-hole ridden mess long before the endings.
It is a fact.
Crucible, Cerberus becoming Sith Empire, Reapers sitting in dark space for thousands of years just for lulz - it is all nonsense, plot-holes. Theese completely destroys not only ME3 plot, but overarching plot of the series.
But it is irrelevant to ITers, because this crap writing makes IT existence impossible.
Therefore, it is ignored.

It's your opinion, don't mistake it for fact.
Nothing about it is "fact".

Logical and narrative inconsistencies - between ME3 and the earlier games, and within ME3 itself - permeat the ME3 so-called "plot" thoroughly starting from the very beginning. Dismissing them with "your opinion, LOL" doesn't make your position worth considering.

Nobody mentioned "logical and narrative inconsistencies".
The Crucible, Cerberus and the Reapers are not nonsensical, it is only your opinion they're.
And it is an opinion the writing is crap.

Yes, they are. The Crucible is especially indefensible, from the get-go. It is what it is, crap writing spread over crap plot. It is not opinion. Anyone who has any familiarity with litereary theory will say that to you - the ME3 plot is bad from the get go. There are literally thousands of posts on this board detailing how exactly the ME3 plot (not just the ending, the entire plot) is bad and logically broken. It hcan hardly be called plot at all. Hell the Little Red Riding Hood has better, more logically consistent and complex plot than ME3 and that is (if you actually take time to analyze plot threads and their interplay) an undeniable fact. But I'm not about to repeat all that, 'cause you'll just reply "that's just like, your opinion, man", and continue to prop your little Mad Hatter theory. Have fun.

Or, and writing being crap is opinion too? In the first minutes of the game: "This is not about strategy or tactic: we fight or we die!" A military officer said that to other military officers? LOL, Shepard, I am disappoint.

Modifié par avenging_teabag, 21 novembre 2012 - 01:52 .

[Yesmar]

avenging_teabag wrote...

Yesmar wrote...

avenging_teabag wrote...

Yesmar wrote...

Maxster_ wrote...


1. ME3 is nonsensical plot-hole ridden mess long before the endings.
It is a fact.
Crucible, Cerberus becoming Sith Empire, Reapers sitting in dark space for thousands of years just for lulz - it is all nonsense, plot-holes. Theese completely destroys not only ME3 plot, but overarching plot of the series.
But it is irrelevant to ITers, because this crap writing makes IT existence impossible.
Therefore, it is ignored.

It's your opinion, don't mistake it for fact.
Nothing about it is "fact".

Logical and narrative inconsistencies - between ME3 and the earlier games, and within ME3 itself - permeat the ME3 so-called "plot" thoroughly starting from the very beginning. Dismissing them with "your opinion, LOL" doesn't make your position worth considering.

Nobody mentioned "logical and narrative inconsistencies".
The Crucible, Cerberus and the Reapers are not nonsensical, it is only your opinion they're.
And it is an opinion the writing is crap.

Yes, they are. The Crucible is especially indefensible, from the get-go. It is what it is, crap writing spread over crap plot. It is not opinion. Anyone who has any familiarity with litereary theory will say that to you - the ME3 plot is bad from the get go. There are literally thousands of posts on this board detailing how exactly the ME3 plot (not just the ending, the entire plot) is bad and logically broken. It hcan hardly be called plot at all. Hell the Little Red Riding Hood has better, more logically consistent and complex plot than ME3 and that is (if you actually take time to analyze plot threads and their interplay) an undeniable fact. But I'm not about to repeat all that, 'cause you'll just reply "that's just like, your opinion, man", and continue to prop your little Mad Hatter theory. Have fun.

Or, and writing being crap is opinion too? In the first minutes of the game: "This is not about strategy or tactic: we fight or we die!" A military officer said that to other military officers? LOL, Shepard, I am disappoint.

I'm not sure why you're getting annoyed.
Just don't mistake your opinions for facts because I will correct you.

[spirosz]

Applepie_Svk wrote...

As far as I know EA don´t care about fans, they care only about money and deadlines - so as far as they have COD crowd they are fine. Look at Dead Space 3, they said that we know that fans are angry about multiplayer and we are sorry but this is the way that game must evolve so we are going to use MP anyway...

When did they say this? 

[avenging_teabag]

Yesmar wrote...

avenging_teabag wrote...

Yesmar wrote...

avenging_teabag wrote...

Yesmar wrote...

Maxster_ wrote...


1. ME3 is nonsensical plot-hole ridden mess long before the endings.
It is a fact.
Crucible, Cerberus becoming Sith Empire, Reapers sitting in dark space for thousands of years just for lulz - it is all nonsense, plot-holes. Theese completely destroys not only ME3 plot, but overarching plot of the series.
But it is irrelevant to ITers, because this crap writing makes IT existence impossible.
Therefore, it is ignored.

It's your opinion, don't mistake it for fact.
Nothing about it is "fact".

Logical and narrative inconsistencies - between ME3 and the earlier games, and within ME3 itself - permeat the ME3 so-called "plot" thoroughly starting from the very beginning. Dismissing them with "your opinion, LOL" doesn't make your position worth considering.

Nobody mentioned "logical and narrative inconsistencies".
The Crucible, Cerberus and the Reapers are not nonsensical, it is only your opinion they're.
And it is an opinion the writing is crap.

Yes, they are. The Crucible is especially indefensible, from the get-go. It is what it is, crap writing spread over crap plot. It is not opinion. Anyone who has any familiarity with litereary theory will say that to you - the ME3 plot is bad from the get go. There are literally thousands of posts on this board detailing how exactly the ME3 plot (not just the ending, the entire plot) is bad and logically broken. It hcan hardly be called plot at all. Hell the Little Red Riding Hood has better, more logically consistent and complex plot than ME3 and that is (if you actually take time to analyze plot threads and their interplay) an undeniable fact. But I'm not about to repeat all that, 'cause you'll just reply "that's just like, your opinion, man", and continue to prop your little Mad Hatter theory. Have fun.

Or, and writing being crap is opinion too? In the first minutes of the game: "This is not about strategy or tactic: we fight or we die!" A military officer said that to other military officers? LOL, Shepard, I am disappoint.

I'm not sure why you're getting annoyed.
Just don't mistake your opinions for facts because I will correct you.

 But I'm not about to repeat all that, 'cause you'll just reply "that's just like, your opinion, man", and continue to prop your little Mad Hatter theory. Have fun.

Case in point.

[Persephone]

Dr_Extrem wrote...

arial wrote...

The Mad Hanar wrote...

Wow, people are saying a simulation would've been better. C'mon guys, you KNOW you would've been pissed if that was the real ending. You KNOW it. That would've literally been a complete waste of 100+
hours of gameplay.

I think they are in denial.

They know if it ended in a simulation the fans lashing back would be at least double of what it is now.

a s**tstorm double the size of already happened? is that possible? ... they would have turned bsn offline.

I'll celebrate when that happens. This place has become unbearable toxic and vicious.

[Maxster_]

Yesmar wrote...

Maxster_ wrote...


1. ME3 is nonsensical plot-hole ridden mess long before the endings.
It is a fact.
Crucible, Cerberus becoming Sith Empire, Reapers sitting in dark space for thousands of years just for lulz - it is all nonsense, plot-holes. Theese completely destroys not only ME3 plot, but overarching plot of the series.
But it is irrelevant to ITers, because this crap writing makes IT existence impossible.
Therefore, it is ignored.

It's your opinion, don't mistake it for fact.
Nothing about it is "fact".

Sure.
ITers discard any fact, that contradicts their "theory".
Crucible, Cerberus, Reapers sitting in dark space for no reason - this is crap writing, which destroys overarching plot of the series.
Reapes could fly into a galaxy in time of Rachni wars, they just decided to wait for Sovereign to fail.
The fact that reapers can just fly in a galaxy in 0.5-3 years, losing completely nothing - made entire ME1 plot destroyed, made it completely meaningless.

And because of Crucible and Cerberus, entire ME3 story is nonsense.
And this is fact.

2. There is no "real" IT ending.
This is also a fact.
There is no other endings in original ME3. Only one(3) with Catalyst.

That is not fact that is speculating, there could be a IT ending in production.
Therefore it is not fact there is no "real" IT ending as you have no way of knowing.
Therefore it is not fact.

*facedesk*
There is no endings in original ME, other than Catalyst's one(3) which are namely Destroy, Control and Synthesis.
It is a fact.

If you are saying that this is not fact - then tell me how can i get "real" IT ending with my original ME3.

3. ME3 have an EC with extended epilogue(and retcons, and plain crap writing like "evactuation scene"), which released after fans outrage.
This is also fact.
Epilogue from OE extended(retconned) in the EC.

EC is a fact and changed some stuff, it happened.
That is about the only fact, everything else is your opinion.

Sure.
Original ME3 had "real" IT ending.
EC had "real" IT ending.

5. ME3 is objectively badly written.
This also a fact. Story structure is broken, lore is broken, prequels nullified.
Earth:intro, for example, unbelievably badly written.
As is Citadel coup with Udina betraying himself.

This sums up you up, you mistake your opinion as being fact.
Your opinion is not fact.

Lol.
"We die or we die" is good writing.
Udina betraying himself for lulz - is good writing

And of course, those facts are discarded or ignored by ITers.

I'm discarding your opinion, you do not provide any facts.
Post hard facts instead of your bias opinion.

Sure.

[Dr_Extrem]

Persephone wrote...

Dr_Extrem wrote...

arial wrote...

The Mad Hanar wrote...

Wow, people are saying a simulation would've been better. C'mon guys, you KNOW you would've been pissed if that was the real ending. You KNOW it. That would've literally been a complete waste of 100+
hours of gameplay.

I think they are in denial.

They know if it ended in a simulation the fans lashing back would be at least double of what it is now.

a s**tstorm double the size of already happened? is that possible? ... they would have turned bsn offline.

I'll celebrate when that happens. This place has become unbearable toxic and vicious.

like i stated in the other thread ... you are not helping either. accepting other people opinions seems to be hard nowadays.

[Maxster_]

avenging_teabag wrote...

Yesmar wrote...

avenging_teabag wrote...

Yesmar wrote...

Maxster_ wrote...


1. ME3 is nonsensical plot-hole ridden mess long before the endings.
It is a fact.
Crucible, Cerberus becoming Sith Empire, Reapers sitting in dark space for thousands of years just for lulz - it is all nonsense, plot-holes. Theese completely destroys not only ME3 plot, but overarching plot of the series.
But it is irrelevant to ITers, because this crap writing makes IT existence impossible.
Therefore, it is ignored.

It's your opinion, don't mistake it for fact.
Nothing about it is "fact".

Logical and narrative inconsistencies - between ME3 and the earlier games, and within ME3 itself - permeat the ME3 so-called "plot" thoroughly starting from the very beginning. Dismissing them with "your opinion, LOL" doesn't make your position worth considering.

Nobody mentioned "logical and narrative inconsistencies".
The Crucible, Cerberus and the Reapers are not nonsensical, it is only your opinion they're.
And it is an opinion the writing is crap.

Yes, they are. The Crucible is especially indefensible, from the get-go. It is what it is, crap writing spread over crap plot. It is not opinion. Anyone who has any familiarity with litereary theory will say that to you - the ME3 plot is bad from the get go. There are literally thousands of posts on this board detailing how exactly the ME3 plot (not just the ending, the entire plot) is bad and logically broken. It hcan hardly be called plot at all. Hell the Little Red Riding Hood has better, more logically consistent and complex plot than ME3 and that is (if you actually take time to analyze plot threads and their interplay) an undeniable fact. But I'm not about to repeat all that, 'cause you'll just reply "that's just like, your opinion, man", and continue to prop your little Mad Hatter theory. Have fun.

Or, and writing being crap is opinion too? In the first minutes of the game: "This is not about strategy or tactic: we fight or we die!" A military officer said that to other military officers? LOL, Shepard, I am disappoint.

Thanks for clarification, although it won't help.

As for intro - it was unbelievably terrible. I barely stopped myself from quitting and uninstalling ME3 at that time.

[Dr_Extrem]

Maxster_ wrote...

As for intro - it was unbelievably terrible. I barely stopped myself from quitting and uninstalling ME3 at that time.

the real problem is, that the plot proves shepard to be right.

ihmo, it is a rookie mistake, to make the enemy so strong, that only a superweapon can defeat them.

[MegaSovereign]

Dr_Extrem wrote...

Maxster_ wrote...

As for intro - it was unbelievably terrible. I barely stopped myself from quitting and uninstalling ME3 at that time.

the real problem is, that the plot proves shepard to be right.

ihmo, it is a rookie mistake, to make the enemy so strong, that only a superweapon can defeat them.

The Crucible exploits existing technology to defeat the Reapers. Sure it's a super weapon but it's not as contrived as a lot of people make it sound.

It actually makes a good amount of sense that exploiting the Mass Relays would be key to defeating the Reapers.

[Dr_Extrem]

MegaSovereign wrote...

Dr_Extrem wrote...

Maxster_ wrote...

As for intro - it was unbelievably terrible. I barely stopped myself from quitting and uninstalling ME3 at that time.

the real problem is, that the plot proves shepard to be right.

ihmo, it is a rookie mistake, to make the enemy so strong, that only a superweapon can defeat them.

The Crucible exploits existing technology to defeat the Reapers. Sure it's a super weapon but it's not as contrived as a lot of people make it sound.

It actually makes a good amount of sense that exploiting the Mass Relays would be key to defeating the Reapers.

sure .. i am not butthurt about the crucible - it was a logical conclusion and using the mass relays, is the only way to kill all reapers almost simultaneously.

but - you only need that superweapon in the first place, if you write yourself into a corner, where the only thing that can save the day is said supeweapon.

the superweapon is not the problem - the reapers being unkillable without it, is. (not the biggest problem though)

[MegaSovereign]

Dr_Extrem wrote...

MegaSovereign wrote...

Dr_Extrem wrote...

Maxster_ wrote...

As for intro - it was unbelievably terrible. I barely stopped myself from quitting and uninstalling ME3 at that time.

the real problem is, that the plot proves shepard to be right.

ihmo, it is a rookie mistake, to make the enemy so strong, that only a superweapon can defeat them.

The Crucible exploits existing technology to defeat the Reapers. Sure it's a super weapon but it's not as contrived as a lot of people make it sound.

It actually makes a good amount of sense that exploiting the Mass Relays would be key to defeating the Reapers.

sure .. i am not butthurt about the crucible - it was a logical conclusion and using the mass relays, is the only way to kill all reapers almost simultaneously.

but - you only need that superweapon in the first place, if you write yourself into a corner, where the only thing that can save the day is said supeweapon.

the superweapon is not the problem - the reapers being unkillable without it, is. (not the biggest problem though)

It would have been more contrived if the entire Reaper fleet was in one system and you had an opportunity to defeat them conventionally.

Also, the desperation is what united the galaxy.

[Maxster_]

MegaSovereign wrote...

Dr_Extrem wrote...

Maxster_ wrote...

As for intro - it was unbelievably terrible. I barely stopped myself from quitting and uninstalling ME3 at that time.

the real problem is, that the plot proves shepard to be right.

ihmo, it is a rookie mistake, to make the enemy so strong, that only a superweapon can defeat them.

The Crucible exploits existing technology to defeat the Reapers. Sure it's a super weapon but it's not as contrived as a lot of people make it sound.

It actually makes a good amount of sense that exploiting the Mass Relays would be key to defeating the Reapers.

Exploits existing reaper technology, which no one have understanding of.
Designed to exploit existing reaper technology, which no one ever had understaning of.
Designed to interface with another existing piece of reaper technology, Citadel, which no one of the designers had access to and had any knowledge of it functionality, or even if that unknown device even needed in the first place.
Designed to change something, that no one was ever aware it exists(Catalyst).
Transferred throught at least 20000 cycles, every time cycle receiving those plans just right after reapers attack. Which is impossible amount of coincidences.

It is plain absurd and nonsense. It mocks science, engineering and common sense. And it destroys ME3 plot.

Modifié par Maxster_, 21 novembre 2012 - 07:27 .

[EXMEFan]

vs



If you can't see the obvious contradictions in these two videos you aren't very intelligent

[Maxster_]

Dr_Extrem wrote...

MegaSovereign wrote...

Dr_Extrem wrote...

Maxster_ wrote...

As for intro - it was unbelievably terrible. I barely stopped myself from quitting and uninstalling ME3 at that time.

the real problem is, that the plot proves shepard to be right.

ihmo, it is a rookie mistake, to make the enemy so strong, that only a superweapon can defeat them.

The Crucible exploits existing technology to defeat the Reapers. Sure it's a super weapon but it's not as contrived as a lot of people make it sound.

It actually makes a good amount of sense that exploiting the Mass Relays would be key to defeating the Reapers.

sure .. i am not butthurt about the crucible - it was a logical conclusion and using the mass relays, is the only way to kill all reapers almost simultaneously.

but - you only need that superweapon in the first place, if you write yourself into a corner, where the only thing that can save the day is said supeweapon.

the superweapon is not the problem - the reapers being unkillable without it, is. (not the biggest problem though)

Superweapon as plot device is not a problem.
Crucible presented as utter nonsense and absurd - is.

Also, main problem of ME3 is Arrival DLC, which nullified ME1 plot(that could be retconned in ME3, but instead ME3 was built around that).
Reapers sitting in dark space for thousands of years of Sovereign's machinations, when they could just flew into a galaxy in 0.5-3 years, losing completely nothing in the process - this is core problem of ME3. This is what destroys series.

[MegaSovereign]

Maxster_ wrote...

MegaSovereign wrote...

Dr_Extrem wrote...

Maxster_ wrote...

As for intro - it was unbelievably terrible. I barely stopped myself from quitting and uninstalling ME3 at that time.

the real problem is, that the plot proves shepard to be right.

ihmo, it is a rookie mistake, to make the enemy so strong, that only a superweapon can defeat them.

The Crucible exploits existing technology to defeat the Reapers. Sure it's a super weapon but it's not as contrived as a lot of people make it sound.

It actually makes a good amount of sense that exploiting the Mass Relays would be key to defeating the Reapers.

Exploits existing reaper technology, which no one have understanding of.
Designed to exploit existing reaper technology, which no one ever had understaning of.
Designed to interface with another existing piece of reaper technology, Citadel, which no one of the designers had access to and had any knowledge of it functionality, or even if that unknown device even needed in the first place.
Designed to change something, that no one was ever aware it exists(Catalyst).

It is plain absurd and nonsense. It mocks science, engineering and common sense. And it destroys ME3 plot.

I'm pretty sure scientists have some sort of understanding of how the Mass Relays work.

The whole Crucible mechanism/design took countless cycles to come to fruition. In fact I'm pretty sure the current cycle didn't really have to add anything to the current design when they found it.

"It mocks science, engineering and common sense." lol Seriously? You're trying to make it sound offensive when it's not.

[Maxster_]

MegaSovereign wrote...

Maxster_ wrote...

MegaSovereign wrote...

Dr_Extrem wrote...

Maxster_ wrote...

As for intro - it was unbelievably terrible. I barely stopped myself from quitting and uninstalling ME3 at that time.

the real problem is, that the plot proves shepard to be right.

ihmo, it is a rookie mistake, to make the enemy so strong, that only a superweapon can defeat them.

The Crucible exploits existing technology to defeat the Reapers. Sure it's a super weapon but it's not as contrived as a lot of people make it sound.

It actually makes a good amount of sense that exploiting the Mass Relays would be key to defeating the Reapers.

Exploits existing reaper technology, which no one have understanding of.
Designed to exploit existing reaper technology, which no one ever had understaning of.
Designed to interface with another existing piece of reaper technology, Citadel, which no one of the designers had access to and had any knowledge of it functionality, or even if that unknown device even needed in the first place.
Designed to change something, that no one was ever aware it exists(Catalyst).

It is plain absurd and nonsense. It mocks science, engineering and common sense. And it destroys ME3 plot.

I'm pretty sure scientists have some sort of understanding of how the Mass Relays work.

Sure. You know how to drive a automobile, and how to change tires or even change or repair brakes.
Which automatically means that you can design a automobile.

The whole Crucible mechanism/design took countless cycles to come to fruition. In fact I'm pretty sure the current cycle didn't really have to add anything to the current design when they found it.

This is nonsense.
First, Citadel was first thing every cycle lost, second being relay network.

This means, that Crucible can not be designed.

"It mocks science, engineering and common sense." lol Seriously? You're trying to make it sound offensive when it's not.

I'm stating the obvious.