474 réponses à ce sujet

[angol fear]

mvaning wrote...

OperatingWookie wrote...

By your logic if I write about oranges, then no one else in all of human history should be allowed to write, speak, or even think about oranges unless I give the word.

That does not make sense!


Anyways, as the the main topic of the thread, I must say that it's a very interesting point that Seival brings up.

It can't really be supported, but nonetheless is an excellent thing to speculate about.

By your logic, plagerism is a valid technique for making art.

Quotation is a valid technique of making art.

edit :  First, you don't get money from producers, if there's no ending for your story. Second, there are themes and things said or written in Mass Effect 1 that show that it was the original idea. Third, when you play other Bioware games, you see that there are details that will become the main idea of Mass Effect. Mass Effect fit more to their way of thinking a story than the other possibilities I've read.

Modifié par angol fear, 10 février 2013 - 07:04 .

[CynicalShep]

simfamSP wrote...

We should give the Geth new platforms and and reprogram their voices in order to match hot celebreties everywhere, then there'd be peace.

Yes, indeed

[Seival]

The Night Mammoth wrote...

Prove it. 
Prove it. 

Shepard: "Organics and synthetics don't have to destroy each other".
Reapers: "Battle for Rannoch disproves your assumption".

...And one more little reminder about Rannoch. Reapers told Shepard they are harvesting organics to save them long before the final minutes of the game. Anti-enders consider Rannoch final as one of the best moments of the game. So please, listen to what Reapers tell us in that moment instead of just gazing on sunset.

Modifié par Seival, 10 février 2013 - 01:03 .

[The Night Mammoth]

Seival wrote...

The Night Mammoth wrote...

Prove it. 
Prove it. 

Shepard: "Organics and synthetics don't have to destroy each other".
Reapers: "Battle for Rannoch disproves your assumption".

...And one more little reminder about Rannoch. Reapers told Shepard they are harvesting organics to save them long before the final minutes of the game. Anti-enders consider Rannoch final as one of the best moments of the game. So please, listen to what Reapers tell us in that moment instead of just gazing on sunset.

Nothing you just said proves anything you said before. 

You said the Geth would eventually have attacked without the influence of Sovereign, and that the peace obtained at the end of the Rannoch story arc would not last. 

I want you to prove these things. 

Modifié par The Night Mammoth, 10 février 2013 - 01:10 .

[Grubas]

Seival wrote...


Shepard: "Organics and synthetics don't have to destroy each other".
Reapers: "Battle for Rannoch disproves your assumption".

...And one more little reminder about Rannoch. Reapers told Shepard they are harvesting organics to save them long before the final minutes of the game. Anti-enders consider Rannoch final as one of the best moments of the game. So please, listen to what Reapers tell us in that moment instead of just gazing on sunset.

Wow. Dark Energy-plot right there.
 

[GreyLycanTrope]

Seival wrote...
Shepard: "Organics and synthetics don't have to destroy each other".
Reapers: "Battle for Rannoch disproves your assumption".

...And one more little reminder about Rannoch. Reapers told Shepard they are harvesting organics to save them long before the final minutes of the game. Anti-enders consider Rannoch final as one of the best moments of the game. So please, listen to what Reapers tell us in that moment instead of just gazing on sunset.

I always laugh at that line given that the Geth and Quarians just did in fact stop destoying each other. This is why I can't take the line about harvesting us to save us seriously. Not to mention you yourself are forgetting that what the Rannoch Reaper actualy said was "without our intervention, organics are doomed." Given that it was Reaper intervention which upgraded the Geth and stopped the Quarians from destroying them, it doesn't make it a persuasive arugement.

Reaper: You organics can't save yourselves.
Shepard: We just f*cking did, twice.

Modifié par Greylycantrope, 10 février 2013 - 02:19 .

[Indy_S]

"Organics and synthetics will always come into conflict."
"Yeah, well organics and other organics will always come into conflict. And synthetics with other synthetics."
"But we don't care about them. Only one conflict will exterminate all organic life."
"No, they all pose the same level of threat to that. Each one can make WMD's and that's the only way life is going to stop."
"Maybe. Shut up. You're making me look stupid."

[Seival]

The Night Mammoth wrote...

Seival wrote...

The Night Mammoth wrote...

Prove it. 
Prove it. 

Shepard: "Organics and synthetics don't have to destroy each other".
Reapers: "Battle for Rannoch disproves your assumption".

...And one more little reminder about Rannoch. Reapers told Shepard they are harvesting organics to save them long before the final minutes of the game. Anti-enders consider Rannoch final as one of the best moments of the game. So please, listen to what Reapers tell us in that moment instead of just gazing on sunset.

Nothing you just said proves anything you said before. 

You said the Geth would eventually have attacked without the influence of Sovereign, and that the peace obtained at the end of the Rannoch story arc would not last. 

I want you to prove these things. 

It proves everything, if you remember everything that happened before the conversation.

After the first war Geth preferred isolation. There was no reason for a war in the future? Really? Then why Quarians came to their homeworld and attacked the isolated Geth, forcing them to ask the Reapers for help? Wanted their homeworld back so much even being on the brink of death themselves? This is a very nice illustration of organics-vs-synthetics problem.

Battle for Rannoch proves that everything Reapers said about the reasons for harvesting civilizations was correct.

Battle for Rannoch proves that organics-vs-synthetics problem is the main theme of the trilogy.

Battle for Rannoch proves that the ending wasn't rushed.

Battle for Rannoch proves that the ending fits the narrative just perfectly.

[JBPBRC]

Lizardviking wrote...

Bioware's plan for ME as a trilogy can be summed up as...

- Shepard finds out about the Reapers
- Shepard stops the Reapers.

[The Night Mammoth]

Seival wrote...

The Night Mammoth wrote...

Seival wrote...

The Night Mammoth wrote...

Prove it. 
Prove it. 

Shepard: "Organics and synthetics don't have to destroy each other".
Reapers: "Battle for Rannoch disproves your assumption".

...And one more little reminder about Rannoch. Reapers told Shepard they are harvesting organics to save them long before the final minutes of the game. Anti-enders consider Rannoch final as one of the best moments of the game. So please, listen to what Reapers tell us in that moment instead of just gazing on sunset.

Nothing you just said proves anything you said before. 

You said the Geth would eventually have attacked without the influence of Sovereign, and that the peace obtained at the end of the Rannoch story arc would not last. 

I want you to prove these things. 

It proves everything, if you remember everything that happened before the conversation.

After the first war Geth preferred isolation. There was no reason for a war in the future? Really? Then why Quarians came to their homeworld and attacked the isolated Geth, forcing them to ask the Reapers for help? Wanted their homeworld back so much even being on the brink of death themselves? This is a very nice illustration of organics-vs-synthetics problem.

Nothing in the above paragraph proves either of the assertions you made. It's all waffle, irrelevant, pointless, meaningless.

Battle for Rannoch proves that everything Reapers said about the reasons for harvesting civilizations was correct.

The geth aren't trying to, nor do they want to, nor do they have the capability to, wipe out all organice life. So no, it doesn't. 

Battle for Rannoch proves that organics-vs-synthetics problem is the main theme of the trilogy.

Battle for Rannoch proves that the ending wasn't rushed.

Battle for Rannoch proves that the ending fits the narrative just perfectly.

Nope. That the relations between synthetics and organics is a very large and important part of the Rannoch sub-plot does not make it the main theme of the trilogy. 

Why? 

Because it's not part of anything outside the Rannoch arc. Until the end, and even then, the ideas in each part of the story are far from consistent.  

[AresKeith]

And Seival loses more points in his weak argument

[Seival]

@The Night Mammoth
I suppose you will never understand Mass Effect Trilogy. All explanations were given to you several times (by the game and by the fans), but you just refuse them.

You don't want to be constructive about the ending being planned from the beginning or not, because you don't want to see the main theme of the game, always focusing on the secondary themes, and saying they are the main ones.

[AresKeith]

Seival wrote...

@The Night Mammoth
I suppose you will never understand Mass Effect Trilogy. All explanations were given to you several times (by the game and by the fans), but you just refuse them.

You don't want to be constructive about the ending being planned from the beginning or not, because you don't want to see the main theme of the game, always focusing on the secondary themes, and saying they are the main ones.

This comment shows that you have nothing to counter his last post with because he is being constructive, your the one ignoring his points because he doesn't agree to your logic (which is actually wrong)

[GreyLycanTrope]

Seival wrote...

@The Night Mammoth
I suppose you will never understand Mass Effect Trilogy. All explanations were given to you several times (by the game and by the fans), but you just refuse them.

You don't want to be constructive about the ending being planned from the beginning or not, because you don't want to see the main theme of the game, always focusing on the secondary themes, and saying they are the main ones.

Mammoth posed some very specific questions and you didn't specifically answer any of them. If he's failing to understand something than it's up to you to explain it, you're failing to do so, meaning you're not being contructive.

[fiendishchicken]

Go back to your gulag Seival.

[The Night Mammoth]

Seival wrote...

@The Night Mammoth
I suppose you will never understand Mass Effect Trilogy. All explanations were given to you several times (by the game and by the fans), but you just refuse them.

Or I have a different perspective on all these things.

Don't cry, I know it must be difficult to accept that other people aren't mindless drones and can form their own opinions, and I know it's really, really annoying when those pesky free-thinking sapient individuals have the nerve to express their said differing opinions when given the opportunity.

I'm not even going to address the other things you said, I'll just reiterate that the trilogy does not have a main theme. An reasonably intelligent person should be able to figure out what that means in relation to things you suggested I did.

Modifié par The Night Mammoth, 10 février 2013 - 04:11 .

[adayaday]

AresKeith wrote...

Seival wrote...

@The Night Mammoth
I suppose you will never understand Mass Effect Trilogy. All explanations were given to you several times (by the game and by the fans), but you just refuse them.

You don't want to be constructive about the ending being planned from the beginning or not, because you don't want to see the main theme of the game, always focusing on the secondary themes, and saying they are the main ones.

This comment shows that you have nothing to counter his last post with because he is being constructive, your the one ignoring his points because he doesn't agree to your logic (which is actually wrong)

+1

Also by looking at your previous threads it would seem that the "haters" have btter understanding of the trilogy then you...*cough*crashtestthoery*cough*

[Seival]

AresKeith wrote...

Seival wrote...

@The Night Mammoth
I suppose you will never understand Mass Effect Trilogy. All explanations were given to you several times (by the game and by the fans), but you just refuse them.

You don't want to be constructive about the ending being planned from the beginning or not, because you don't want to see the main theme of the game, always focusing on the secondary themes, and saying they are the main ones.

This comment shows that you have nothing to counter his last post with because he is being constructive, your the one ignoring his points because he doesn't agree to your logic (which is actually wrong)

This comment shows that as any anti-ender he refuses all counter-arguments made by pro-enders.
Also, this comment shows that I will not repeat counter-arguments that opponent just ignores.
Finally, this comment shows that anti-enders only listen to themselves, and arguing with them is a waste of time.



...I prefer to wait for on-topic opinions from constructive people and discuss the matter with them.

Modifié par Seival, 10 février 2013 - 04:23 .

[GreyLycanTrope]

You haven't made a counter-argument you've made statements that you haven't been able to back up.

[The Night Mammoth]

Like the dog that comes last at the Cruft's agility contest, Sevial is pretty good at weaving and dodging all those obstacles, but still not good enough to avoid looking stupidly transparent.

Boohoo, all those nasty 'anti-enders' (like this is a f*cking election season political debate and everyone needs a condescending title), expressing their opinions of a forum, not agreeing like good little sheep. My heart f*cking bleeds.

[Drewton]

Greylycantrope wrote...

You haven't made a counter-argument you've made statements that you haven't been able to back up.

This

[AresKeith]

lolz at seival, your the only one here trying to use "pro-ender and anti-ender" as a poor excuse to discount other people, that's literally the toxic that people are complaining about on BSN

Your ignoring people because they don't agree with you because you picked out two lines from Rannoch, when the whole conversation doesn't back up yout assumption.