617 réponses à ce sujet

[BatmanTurian]

Sion1138 wrote...

The destruction scenario is the most interesting one:

- The galactic infrastructure is severely damaged.

- Different groups got out of the ordeal in different states which yields great potential for new conflicts and intrigue.

- Many are stranded away from their home planets after the battle which makes Earth a whole new kind of 'crucible'. Great stories could come out of that alone.

- The migrant fleet being stranded is a very interesting turn of events, ironic as well seeing as how they had just reclaimed their world and now many of them again wouldn't be able to return there.

- The geth being shut down could lead to a great story as well, having the player attempt to restore them.

And there's a lot more. I do not understand how you could consider this scenario boring when the other two basically extricate a great deal of interesting complexity from the Mass Effect world. 

If they keep the Citadel parked in Sol, then Earth and Humans would become more important. Mars could be terraformed or inhabited to house people who are stranded, etc.

[ruggly]

Ieldra2 wrote...
 treating the Catalyst scene as a black box is probably good for our sanity.

ain't that the truth..

[clennon8]

There doesn't seem to be much to discuss here, really. If someone thinks a galaxy where everybody is NOT space-magically transmogrified into cyborgs is boring, then how can you gainsay them?

Modifié par clennon8, 15 février 2013 - 09:23 .

[BatmanTurian]

clennon8 wrote...

There doesn't seem to be much to discuss here, really. If someone thinks a galaxy where everybody is NOT space-magically transmogrified into cyborgs is boring, then how can you gainsay them?

I wish we could all live and let live, but none of these threads ever end up that way.

[jtav]

It's not that Destroy is intrinsically boring, it's that it's presented in a boring way. Lance sounds extremely bored in his narration, and the speech itself feels trite. It would be completely possible to write a Destroy that is interesting by emphasizing different things, getting a new narrator, and making some of the slides more visually interesting. Though when I brought up the lack of a "geewhiz" factor, I was told Destroy wasn't for me.

[Meltemph]

It's still recognizeable in the presentation, a combined effect of several elements of the writing throughout the trilogy and the "abomination aesthetic" of the Reaper minions.

Just no... I'm sorry but any romantic elements in destroy are created by you, not intrinsic in the choice itself. Destroy is too precise and grounded for it to be considered a romantic choice. Not that, that doesn't prevent someone from choosing it for romantic reasons, but that could be applied to literally anything.

[Daniel_N7]

Destroy is the "ends justify the means" choice. Ethically questionable, of course. As Javik says: «Stand amongst the ashes of a trillion dead souls and ask the ghosts if honor matters.»
But, then again, all the other options are ethically questionable just as well, if not more. You just can't win in this game.

[clennon8]

Well, I mean, I guess it's fair if you want to see romantic elements in Destroy, just as it's fair when I see overbearing religious elements in Synthesis. Vitalism, faith, martyrdom, afterlife/deification fantasies, etc.

Modifié par clennon8, 15 février 2013 - 09:55 .

[Meltemph]

 

Well, I mean, I guess it's fair if you want to see romantic elements in Destroy, just as it's fair when I see overbearing religious elements in Synthesis. Vitalism, faith, martyrdom, afterlife/deification fantasies, etc.

That really isnt the same thing though.  Sure, someone who wants to romantisize about something can do it, whether there was anything there that resembled it or not.  With synthetsis or control it is built into the choice itself, by its lack of any specifics and the alagory that comes after it.  

Destroy offers nothing, outside of its designated purpose, and leaves everything else open ended, with no clear direction of where they go from here.  The others are very precise about a philisophical and metaphisical approach to "fixing the galaxy".  The mentality is literally built into those endings, which is why the biggest supporters of thsoe endings typically talking about fixing their percieved wrongs of organics.  Essentially, control and synthesis are so vague it allows a person to romantasize their perfect world.  That is a substansive difference with destroy.  

[leminzplz]

Destroy would have to be my least favourite...that's unfortunate because I always make that canon for my Shepards

[clennon8]

Meltemph wrote...

 

Well, I mean, I guess it's fair if you want to see romantic elements in Destroy, just as it's fair when I see overbearing religious elements in Synthesis. Vitalism, faith, martyrdom, afterlife/deification fantasies, etc.

That really isnt the same thing though.  Sure, someone who wants to romantisize about something can do it, whether there was anything there that resembled it or not.  With synthetsis or control it is built into the choice itself, by its lack of any specifics and the alagory that comes after it.  

Destroy offers nothing, outside of its designated purpose, and leaves everything else open ended, with no clear direction of where they go from here.  The others are very precise about a philisophical and metaphisical approach to "fixing the galaxy".  The mentality is literally built into those endings, which is why the biggest supporters of thsoe endings typically talking about fixing their percieved wrongs of organics.  Essentially, control and synthesis are so vague it allows a person to romantasize their perfect world.  That is a substansive difference with destroy.  

I see what you're saying.  I guess maybe that's why they find Destroy boring?

[jtav]

Not romantic as in romanticizing something, but Romantic. It hearkens back to an earlier time before humanity discovered Reaper technology, and says we are better off if we don't have these artificial things in our lives. It's very Keats-ian really.

[Meltemph]

jtav wrote...

Not romantic as in romanticizing something, but Romantic. It hearkens back to an earlier time before humanity discovered Reaper technology, and says we are better off if we don't have these artificial things in our lives. It's very Keats-ian really.

Again, that is on you, the person picking it, to see it that way.  There is no inharent motivation for picking destroy, other then it gets rid of a problem in an understandable and grounded way, with very defined consequences.   Anything beyond this is created by the player, becuase the chocie tiself doesnt give you anything else, motivations are self driven.

[clennon8]

jtav wrote...

Not romantic as in romanticizing something, but Romantic. It hearkens back to an earlier time before humanity discovered Reaper technology, and says we are better off if we don't have these artificial things in our lives. It's very Keats-ian really.

I think we all understood that.

[Meltemph]

clennon8 wrote...

Meltemph wrote...

 

Well, I mean, I guess it's fair if you want to see romantic elements in Destroy, just as it's fair when I see overbearing religious elements in Synthesis. Vitalism, faith, martyrdom, afterlife/deification fantasies, etc.

That really isnt the same thing though.  Sure, someone who wants to romantisize about something can do it, whether there was anything there that resembled it or not.  With synthetsis or control it is built into the choice itself, by its lack of any specifics and the alagory that comes after it.  

Destroy offers nothing, outside of its designated purpose, and leaves everything else open ended, with no clear direction of where they go from here.  The others are very precise about a philisophical and metaphisical approach to "fixing the galaxy".  The mentality is literally built into those endings, which is why the biggest supporters of thsoe endings typically talking about fixing their percieved wrongs of organics.  Essentially, control and synthesis are so vague it allows a person to romantasize their perfect world.  That is a substansive difference with destroy.  

I see what you're saying.  I guess maybe that's why they find Destroy boring?

Well it makes sense, if the goal of a person is to create a personal vision or direction you want the galaxy to take. Anyone willing to leave it up to more then just "you", will obviously have a lot of problems choosing anything else, specially if you are picking for any other reason other then practicle.  

[jtav]

Meltemph wrote...

jtav wrote...

Not romantic as in romanticizing something, but Romantic. It hearkens back to an earlier time before humanity discovered Reaper technology, and says we are better off if we don't have these artificial things in our lives. It's very Keats-ian really.

Again, that is on you, the person picking it, to see it that way.  There is no inharent motivation for picking destroy, other then it gets rid of a problem in an understandable and grounded way, with very defined consequences.   Anything beyond this is created by the player, becuase the chocie tiself doesnt give you anything else, motivations are self driven.

I'm not talking about what any individual player's motivation is. But there is a strong "and now we shall return to a humbler and more virtuous state" vibe in the epilogue. The idea that humanity is fine as it is very much present there. All meaning is created to some degree by the reader/viewer/player but I didn't create the Romantic vibes anymore then I created the religious imagery of Synthesis.

[Meltemph]

But there is a strong "and now we shall return to a humbler and more virtuous state" vibe in the epilogue. The idea that humanity is fine as it is very much present there. All meaning is created to some degree by the reader/viewer/player but I didn't create the Romantic vibes

ITT: I see it this way, therefor it is.

I'm sorry but you have given nothing of substance that shows a romantic vision of "a humbler and more virtuous state", this is you reaching. I'm not sure how you don't even see in this very quote that you indeed created a romantic vibe with how you perceive destroy.

[Ieldra]

clennon8 wrote...
I see what you're saying.  I guess maybe that's why they find Destroy boring?

Not so. As I said, I find Destroy boring because it makes of the ME trilogy a story that can be summarized as "kill the evil monsters and go home to friends and family". Extremely conventional.

[sH0tgUn jUliA]

The whole idea of choosing ending A, B, or C was simply terrible to begin with. If the writers felt they had to "explain" the ending to us peons they failed miserably. The slide shows, all three of them, look like nothing more than low budget propaganda movies. The EC while it solved some problems, in other cases created more problems. The only ending at this time that takes care of the entire problem is the MEHEM, and even that isn't perfect. I wish they had issued a full toolset with the game so we could start fully modding the single player campaign, or make our own add ons.

Honestly I don't know what the hell the writers were thinking. You don't go and tack a 2010 pseudo-philosophical craptastic ending onto a late 1980s - early 1990s sci-fi action adventure RPG trilogy. You stay within the genre you started in ME1, continued in ME2 and first 98.5% of ME3 and end it with a FK YEAH!! (no Ewoks -- that's so early 80s) Mr. Hudson, you do not end it with an open ending!

[Meltemph]

ME trilogy a story that can be summarized as "kill the evil monsters and go home to friends and family". Extremely conventional.

Only if you want to summarize it like that...but well, it is advantageous for you to do so, judging by your reasoning behind your choices. I mean, it your are going to simplify it like that, you are giving a lot of leeway to summarize it any way people want, so your point is lost on its own point.

[clennon8]

jtav wrote...

Meltemph wrote...

jtav wrote...

Not romantic as in romanticizing something, but Romantic. It hearkens back to an earlier time before humanity discovered Reaper technology, and says we are better off if we don't have these artificial things in our lives. It's very Keats-ian really.

Again, that is on you, the person picking it, to see it that way.  There is no inharent motivation for picking destroy, other then it gets rid of a problem in an understandable and grounded way, with very defined consequences.   Anything beyond this is created by the player, becuase the chocie tiself doesnt give you anything else, motivations are self driven.

I'm not talking about what any individual player's motivation is. But there is a strong "and now we shall return to a humbler and more virtuous state" vibe in the epilogue. The idea that humanity is fine as it is very much present there. All meaning is created to some degree by the reader/viewer/player but I didn't create the Romantic vibes anymore then I created the religious imagery of Synthesis.

I saw a strong Self Determination vibe to the Destroy ending.  I suppose that's a subset of Romanticism?  Anyway, I don't begrudge your deconstruction of Destroy.

[adayaday]

Ieldra2 wrote...

clennon8 wrote...
I see what you're saying.  I guess maybe that's why they find Destroy boring?

Not so. As I said, I find Destroy boring because it makes of the ME trilogy a story that can be summarized as "kill the evil monsters and go home to friends and family". Extremely conventional.

While it may be boring its not necessarily a bad thing,depending on your personal taste and head canon it may be more compeling story.

[jtav]

clennon8 wrote...

jtav wrote...

Meltemph wrote...

jtav wrote...

Not romantic as in romanticizing something, but Romantic. It hearkens back to an earlier time before humanity discovered Reaper technology, and says we are better off if we don't have these artificial things in our lives. It's very Keats-ian really.

Again, that is on you, the person picking it, to see it that way.  There is no inharent motivation for picking destroy, other then it gets rid of a problem in an understandable and grounded way, with very defined consequences.   Anything beyond this is created by the player, becuase the chocie tiself doesnt give you anything else, motivations are self driven.

I'm not talking about what any individual player's motivation is. But there is a strong "and now we shall return to a humbler and more virtuous state" vibe in the epilogue. The idea that humanity is fine as it is very much present there. All meaning is created to some degree by the reader/viewer/player but I didn't create the Romantic vibes anymore then I created the religious imagery of Synthesis.

I saw a strong Self Determination vibe to the Destroy ending.  I suppose that's a subset of Romanticism?  Anyway, I don't begrudge your deconstruction of Destroy.

It's there, but it's buried under all the machines going away and the relays being toast with nothing implied to replace them. That's why I say it's a question of what's emphasized versus anything that's wrong with Destroy per se.

[Ieldra]

Meltemph wrote...

ME trilogy a story that can be summarized as "kill the evil monsters and go home to friends and family". Extremely conventional.

Only if you want to summarize it like that...but well, it is advantageous for you to do so, judging by your reasoning behind your choices. I mean, it your are going to simplify it like that, you are giving a lot of leeway to summarize it any way people want, so your point is lost on its own point.

Sophistry. If I took you seriously, then it'd all end with nothing we say having any meaning at all. I don't think it can be contested that the more everything else stays the same, the more killing the evil monsters and going home appears as the sole focus of the story. High EMS Destroy goes a long way towards that with having the relays repaired in fairly short order. Low EMS Destroy does not have that problem, but it has the stronger Romantic vibe.

Modifié par Ieldra2, 15 février 2013 - 10:40 .

[Ieldra]

adayaday wrote...

Ieldra2 wrote...

clennon8 wrote...
I see what you're saying.  I guess maybe that's why they find Destroy boring?

Not so. As I said, I find Destroy boring because it makes of the ME trilogy a story that can be summarized as "kill the evil monsters and go home to friends and family". Extremely conventional.

While it may be boring its not necessarily a bad thing,depending on your personal taste and head canon it may be more compeling story.

Definitely. It has potential. It's just that none of that potential is hinted at in the epilogue. Also, of course headcanon can make everything better.