272 réponses à ce sujet

[99DP1982]

Someone With Mass wrote...

Rifneno wrote...

Conventional victory is stupid. Let's do some math. It takes 3-4 dreadnoughts to bring down one Reaper capital ship. A lot of people know this. What people don't seem to know is the numbers on each side. Before the invasion, all Council races combined had 85 dreadnoughts. Multiple dreadnoughts are confirmed destroyed in ME3, and many more are likely lost that we don't know about.

Now how many Reapers are there? Well let's start small. Remember that quick glimpse of a Reaper fleet at the end of ME2? Somebody counted. 292 ships are seen, and very likely they're all capital ships. Chances are, there's far, far more. The Leviathan of Dis was dated at about a billion years old. So the Reapers have been reaping for at least that long. One of the writers told us that the Reapers rarely lose even one capital ship per cycle. So let's assume they lose one every other cycle. So the most conservative estimate of their capital ship numbers is an astounding ten thousand. Which makes sense when you consider that everytime we're in a major city, be it on Earth or Thessia or whatever, you can see multiple capital ships prancing about. 10,000 capital ships vs. 85 dreadnoughts. Still think we've got a chance in a straight up fight? If so, I recommend rehab.

You know what's also stupid? To expect the allied forces to simply charge into the battle without implementing the most basic of warfare tactics, which they have more than likely developed plenty of during thousands of years.

yup, it's not like reapers didn't have billion years of warfare experience behidn them... I am sure that all the assimilated races knew nothing of warfare, especially ones who could rule the galatical empire as the dominant race... not to mention the knowledge of leviathans to start with...

I am sure that the puny 20-30k years of slightly more sophisticated warfare than blind charging on are a match for such an experience....

PPL, lets not be delusional, there is 0 chances for conventional victory unless you get some "special" help. like mass disable of shields or a weapon that messes up IFFs of reapers or disables weapons or makes them innert - basically some better version of crucible solution...

[AlanC9]

Fandango9641 wrote...

Could people please consider the confused, incongruous, state of our current endings before presuming to tell us all how unlikely a victory sans Casper would be? Again, the only (only, only, only, only) reason conventional victory is not possible is because Mac and Casey insisted on taking the trilogy off on some bizarre, self-indulgent tangent at the 11th hour.

There's no evidence Bio ever intended a conventional victory, you know.

[AlanC9]

fiendishchicken wrote...

AlanC9 wrote...

Someone With Mass wrote...
I like to think that the common theme in the trilogy until ME3 switched it out for all the boo-hoo sacrifice crap was that there's always a chance.

Shepard stopped the Reapers' schemes plenty of times while being told that it was impossible.

Yep. The Crucible is the chance. The only chance. Activating the Crucible is every bit as impossible as any other impossible thing Shepard does.

It's a lousy contrived chance that pretty much requires Shepard's death in 5/7 endings (2 Controls, 3 Destroys, 1 synthecrap, and 1 refuse) so that BW could nail in the boo-hoo sacrifice and kill off Shepard so that they don't have to make a sequel with him.

Sure, it's contrived. Having Shepard be crucial is contrived. All RPGs are contrived.

[AlanC9]

Fandango9641 wrote...

AlanC9 wrote...

Fandango9641 wrote...

Could people please consider the confused, incongruous, state of our current endings before presuming to tell us all how unlikely a victory sans Casper would be? Again, the only (only, only, only, only) reason conventional victory is not possible is because Mac and Casey insisted on taking the trilogy off on some bizarre, self-indulgent tangent at the 11th hour.

There's no evidence Bio ever intended a conventional victory, you know.

I know.

OK.... so "at the 11th hour" is just hyperbole?

[Darkin30]

I don't believe in the no win scenario

[AlanC9]

Fandango9641 wrote...

Nope - Mac and Casey wrote that **** alright and '11th hour' isn’t referring to the games development cycle.

So 11th hour just means that the tangent's the end of the game?

OK, but then what you're saying just isn't true -- the tangent they took the game on had nothing to do with not having a conventional victory, since Bio wasn't planning a conventional victory long before before anyone came up with that tangent.

[katamuro]

Darkin30 wrote...

I don't believe in the no win scenario

Me too.

[sw04ca]

Darkin30 wrote...

I don't believe in the no win scenario

Perhaps not, but it believes in you.

Kirk found out, and so did Shepard.

[Sejborg]

For a conventional victory to make any kind of sense they would have to rewrite alot of story elements dating all the way back to ME1. And as a consequence alot of what made the Reapers interesting as an enemy would have to be trashed.

Conventional victory is just incredibly lame. In ME1 and ME2 Shepard fights with everything she's got to stop the reapers from arriving. And then when they finally arrive? Yeah... we just kicks their asses because we have Thanix cannons on the Normandy, and we have made friends with the geth.

Unless you want to take away all of the danger that the Reapers represented - like having performed the harvest again and again and again for an eternity - you would just have an unbelievably flat story.

Countless of times the reapers have performed the harvest. But we beat them because of Normandy, geth, and friends... blaahhh. That would just be a terrible story.

There have been countless of earlier cycles, and now I am to believe that we are the first cycle that managed to come together and fight as one unit against the reapers? No. Believing that is either arrogant or something else. Your conventional victory do not fit into the established universe in any way. It just don't.

[string3r]

Sejborg wrote...

For a conventional victory to make any kind of sense they would have to rewrite alot of story elements dating all the way back to ME1. And as a consequence alot of what made the Reapers interesting as an enemy would have to be trashed.

Conventional victory is just incredibly lame. In ME1 and ME2 Shepard fights with everything she's got to stop the reapers from arriving. And then when they finally arrive? Yeah... we just kicks their asses because we have Thanix cannons on the Normandy, and we have made friends with the geth.

Unless you want to take away all of the danger that the Reapers represented - like having performed the harvest again and again and again for an eternity - you would just have an unbelievably flat story.

Countless of times the reapers have performed the harvest. But we beat them because of Normandy, geth, and friends... blaahhh. That would just be a terrible story.

There have been countless of earlier cycles, and now I am to believe that we are the first cycle that managed to come together and fight as one unit against the reapers? No. Believing that is either arrogant or something else. Your conventional victory do not fit into the established universe in any way. It just don't.

And space magic is better?

[Sejborg]

string3r wrote...

Sejborg wrote...

For a conventional victory to make any kind of sense they would have to rewrite alot of story elements dating all the way back to ME1. And as a consequence alot of what made the Reapers interesting as an enemy would have to be trashed.

Conventional victory is just incredibly lame. In ME1 and ME2 Shepard fights with everything she's got to stop the reapers from arriving. And then when they finally arrive? Yeah... we just kicks their asses because we have Thanix cannons on the Normandy, and we have made friends with the geth.

Unless you want to take away all of the danger that the Reapers represented - like having performed the harvest again and again and again for an eternity - you would just have an unbelievably flat story.

Countless of times the reapers have performed the harvest. But we beat them because of Normandy, geth, and friends... blaahhh. That would just be a terrible story.

There have been countless of earlier cycles, and now I am to believe that we are the first cycle that managed to come together and fight as one unit against the reapers? No. Believing that is either arrogant or something else. Your conventional victory do not fit into the established universe in any way. It just don't.

And space magic is better?

Yes. But that is not to say that it couldn't have been handled better.

[Someone With Mass]

Sejborg wrote...

For a conventional victory to make any kind of sense they would have to rewrite alot of story elements dating all the way back to ME1. And as a consequence alot of what made the Reapers interesting as an enemy would have to be trashed.

Conventional victory is just incredibly lame. In ME1 and ME2 Shepard fights with everything she's got to stop the reapers from arriving. And then when they finally arrive? Yeah... we just kicks their asses because we have Thanix cannons on the Normandy, and we have made friends with the geth.

Unless you want to take away all of the danger that the Reapers represented - like having performed the harvest again and again and again for an eternity - you would just have an unbelievably flat story.

Countless of times the reapers have performed the harvest. But we beat them because of Normandy, geth, and friends... blaahhh. That would just be a terrible story.

There have been countless of earlier cycles, and now I am to believe that we are the first cycle that managed to come together and fight as one unit against the reapers? No. Believing that is either arrogant or something else. Your conventional victory do not fit into the established universe in any way. It just don't.

Oh yeah, because the Crucible and its space magic is so much better than a planned out victory against an enemy which more than likely haven't been challenged in this manner before rather than a blind gamble that the player right from the start certainly knows will work in one way or another, since the game wouldn't be fun to play if you lose.

Also, nothing says that we'd need to fight them head on.

It would have been way more interesting than the dark, edgy, grim and mature (I'm using these adjectives in a very sarcastic way, since there's nothing special about this way of writing, which is more of a cop-out than anything and people who say that it's better than a happy ending either haven't read that many stories in different genres or simply lack the imagination) and incredibly pretentious story.

[sw04ca]

No, it really would't have. It would have spoiled the Reapers even worse than they already were, and taken away any sense of achievement in winning the game. If the Reapers were so easy to defeat, then all the excitement from the first couple of games and trying to prevenet them from coming didn't really make sense, did it?

[Sejborg]

Someone With Mass wrote...

Sejborg wrote...

For a conventional victory to make any kind of sense they would have to rewrite alot of story elements dating all the way back to ME1. And as a consequence alot of what made the Reapers interesting as an enemy would have to be trashed.

Conventional victory is just incredibly lame. In ME1 and ME2 Shepard fights with everything she's got to stop the reapers from arriving. And then when they finally arrive? Yeah... we just kicks their asses because we have Thanix cannons on the Normandy, and we have made friends with the geth.

Unless you want to take away all of the danger that the Reapers represented - like having performed the harvest again and again and again for an eternity - you would just have an unbelievably flat story.

Countless of times the reapers have performed the harvest. But we beat them because of Normandy, geth, and friends... blaahhh. That would just be a terrible story.

There have been countless of earlier cycles, and now I am to believe that we are the first cycle that managed to come together and fight as one unit against the reapers? No. Believing that is either arrogant or something else. Your conventional victory do not fit into the established universe in any way. It just don't.

Oh yeah, because the Crucible and its space magic is so much better than a planned out victory against an enemy which more than likely haven't been challenged in this manner before rather than a blind gamble that the player right from the start certainly knows will work in one way or another, since the game wouldn't be fun to play if you lose.

It's not perfect. But at least it's better than what you suggest.

And the crucible should have been introduced in a different manner. I have suggested elsewhere that Liara shoud have found the blueprint for the crucible all the way back in ME1 when you first meet her. Just have it shown on a monitor or hologram, and have a sentence about it, but since it don't matter for that game, they shouldn't waste any time on it. But at least the crucible would have been hinted at, and that is good screen writing. Establishing stuff so it can appear seamlessly later on. Having it introduced in ME3 was too convienant. 

Someone With Mass wrote...

Also, nothing says that we'd need to fight them head on.

Thinking that none of the prior cycles have tried a different tactic than the "head on tactic" is either arrogant or something else.

[Reorte]

Sejborg wrote...

It's not perfect. But at least it's better than what you suggest.

And the crucible should have been introduced in a different manner. I have suggested elsewhere that Liara shoud have found the blueprint for the crucible all the way back in ME1 when you first meet her. Just have it shown on a monitor or hologram, and have a sentence about it, but since it don't matter for that game, they shouldn't waste any time on it. But at least the crucible would have been hinted at, and that is good screen writing. Establishing stuff so it can appear seamlessly later on. Having it introduced in ME3 was too convienant.

The Crucible ends up just as bad as a conventional victory would've been.

We needn't put it back to ME1, it's ME2 where the problems start coming up. ME2 should've been about finding the solution (make the timespan long enough if need be) and ME3 about applying it although I suppose what you say makes sense, a little hint of it back in 1.

Quite honestly a lot of the problem is that they created an enemy who could not be plausibly defeated. Their defeat would mean that our cycle is either massively lucky or massively better than all the previous ones. Both of those are wildly unkikely and the latter incredibly arrogant.

Some sort of work over the cycles approach made sense but again, anything surviving enough cycles for it to not get found and destroyed by the Reapers is pushing it too far. Can get away with it for one or two (the Protheans interfering with the Citadel and us capitalising on their success is fine). I'd hoped that ME3 was going to have something stupendously clever up its sleeve; I trusted BioWare to wow me with something brilliant that I'd never thought of. Boy was I dissapointed.

[sH0tgUn jUliA]

Here's the deal. If they were as overpowered as we think, why bother locking out the relays at all in any of the cycles? Why not just swoop in from dark space and just do a sweep of all the systems. It would be more efficient, and machines are efficient. Unless they're not as OP as we think.

Now if everyone had a brain we could have won. The writers know this. The reapers would have invaded and hit a brick wall. Whoops.

Solution to problem for the writers. Make the organics dumber than orangutans to even the odds. Make the council "See No Evil, Speak No Evil, and Hear No Evil" plus a human who they whom they hate, or one who hates you. And these people represent governments who think the same way. Now you will learn why evil always triumphs, because good is dumb.

So instead of building ships and stuff, they play Uno for three years.

Then it becomes "Shepard! Our Savior! Save us from our stupidity!"

I would have loved some tougher dialogue with the Council in the beginning. I would have loved to have the "air quotes" for reapers for the Turian councilor who blew me off in ME2. So now the Turian believes. Now the Asari believes. Now the Salarian believes. Now Earth believes. Idiots!

Are you really going to choose Red, Green, or Blue for this bunch of dumb asses? Seriously. No. You're going to refuse that Catalyst, because it's conventional victory (or loss) for this group. And when it starts looking bad, your LI and you are going to jack the Normandy and split and find some backwater world and live out your life. Why? Because that's what they deserve.

And in any case, deify Shepard at the end of the game and turn the character into The Shepherd.

[Someone With Mass]

Sejborg wrote...
Thinking that none of the prior cycles have tried a different tactic than the "head on tactic" is either arrogant or something else.

None of the previous cycles evaded the Citadel trap either.

[Sejborg]

Reorte wrote...

Sejborg wrote...

It's not perfect. But at least it's better than what you suggest.

And the crucible should have been introduced in a different manner. I have suggested elsewhere that Liara shoud have found the blueprint for the crucible all the way back in ME1 when you first meet her. Just have it shown on a monitor or hologram, and have a sentence about it, but since it don't matter for that game, they shouldn't waste any time on it. But at least the crucible would have been hinted at, and that is good screen writing. Establishing stuff so it can appear seamlessly later on. Having it introduced in ME3 was too convienant.

The Crucible ends up just as bad as a conventional victory would've been.

We needn't put it back to ME1, it's ME2 where the problems start coming up. ME2 should've been about finding the solution (make the timespan long enough if need be) and ME3 about applying it although I suppose what you say makes sense, a little hint of it back in 1.

I really don't see much of the point of ME2. It adds very little to the story. I really don't understand why it's the most popular of the 3?

Reorte wrote...
Quite honestly a lot of the problem is that they created an enemy who could not be plausibly defeated. Their defeat would mean that our cycle is either massively lucky or massively better than all the previous ones. Both of those are wildly unkikely and the latter incredibly arrogant.

Yes. But the fact that they couldn't be defeated by any plausible way, was what made them the most interesting to me. Otherwise the enemy could just have been Cerberus. A terrorist organisation hell bend on destroying the world and make a fourth reich or something instead. You just have to gather your allies to kill them. Like we did in Dragon Age. I liked that gathering allies was just going to be the first step. 

Reorte wrote...
Some sort of work over the cycles approach made sense but again, anything surviving enough cycles for it to not get found and destroyed by the Reapers is pushing it too far. Can get away with it for one or two (the Protheans interfering with the Citadel and us capitalising on their success is fine). I'd hoped that ME3 was going to have something stupendously clever up its sleeve; I trusted BioWare to wow me with something brilliant that I'd never thought of. Boy was I dissapointed.

Yeah. I feel similar.

[sH0tgUn jUliA]

Why is ME2 the most popular of the three? It is fun to play. You get to be a bad ass, throw a merc out a window, and it has a kick ass ending.

[Sejborg]

sH0tgUn jUliA wrote...

Why is ME2 the most popular of the three? It is fun to play. You get to be a bad ass, throw a merc out a window, and it has a kick ass ending.

I felt the story was stuck in mud from the point you first meet The Illusive Man till you start the suicide mission. All the recruiting and loyalty missions became tedious for me. But I do agree that the ending was spectacular. 

[MacroSpamMK]

If you had enough Paragon you should've been able to choose the blue writing with the Catalyst and lecture him into realising what he's done is wrong and that he should feel bad. And then the Catalyst says, "You know what? You're right. I should go now". And then the Reapers stop fighting and leave the galaxy.

I mean, we were able to win the game with blue writing everywhere else...why not at the very end?

[liggy002]

Jade8aby88 wrote...

Seriously, this topic has been discussed so much on the BSN since the ME3 release, and I'm just sick of it!
 
People always keep saying that they want a conventional victory when it just downright wont happen! We've had threads and polls and groups about it, yet the people just don't seem to get it, it.is.impossible! No matter how much you want it, or think you want it, it cannot and will not happen.

Now, before you start raging at me, let me explain why conventional victory is impossible.

First of all, we have the Thannix Cannons, since receiving this technology from Sovereign in ME1 the galaxy (specifically Turians) have reverse engineered this weaponry and applied it to their fighters, and in ME3 they had been continuously developing the technology and started manufacturing "Thannix MIssiles" as well. Proving that they have been improving upon this already powerful technology.

Second of all, we have the Normandy, packed with Reaper tech from Thannix weaponry to the Reaper IFF, not to mention a bunch of other anti-Reaper algorithms to boot. This stealth frigate allows us to travel around the galaxy and fight the Reapers, hosting the most badass of them all, whose very existence is unconventional, Commander Shepard.

Third of all... We have the Geth, now if you saved this race on Rannoch you will notice that in order to do so, they have to upload Reaper code, this is not only to improve their own way of life, but to also help them become individualistic entities which, in turn, helps them become better soldiers. So if you saved the Geth on Rannoch, you now have a Legion of Synthetic forces willing to help fight for you in this war. This also means that they are now, yes that's right, and unconventional ally.

So let's stop whining about a conventional victory please, and let's start fighting for an unconventionally victory!

I see what you did there Jade.  That sounds more like an unconventional conventional victory to me.  If it's not the Crucible, I like it.