582 réponses à ce sujet

[ChuckTesla]

Indy_S wrote...

AdmiralCheez wrote...

Mass Effect does a better job at some of the open-minded stuff than other games, and actually does some stuff very well, but don't you dare sit here and tell me that it's the most open, equal-minded game ever made.

Yeah. That title goes to Portal.

And Biotic Sage, Portal's story is universally loved.

Agreed.

[AdmiralCheez]

Biotic Sage wrote...

Well I think we've established that in terms of the Catalyst and the final decision, the level of suck is subjective, because you think there are high levels of suck and I think there are low levels.  And you don't need to write novels to appreciate writing, the more important thing is to read a lot.  The more frames of reference you have the better.  ME3's ending isn't universally hated (as some on these boards seem to think).  It's vocally hated, which is not the same thing.  Nor is it universally loved, obviously, but I have yet to see a book, game, movie, etc. that is universally either loathed or loved.

Okay agreed, but seriously, why do you like it?  All of the stuff you've cited in this thread seems to relate to authorial intent and symbolism.  As far as I can tell, you like it for what it's supposed to be.

Unfortunately, "supposed to" just doesn't do it for me.

[Biotic Sage]

Indy_S wrote...

AdmiralCheez wrote...

Mass Effect does a better job at some of the open-minded stuff than other games, and actually does some stuff very well, but don't you dare sit here and tell me that it's the most open, equal-minded game ever made.

Yeah. That title goes to Portal.

And Biotic Sage, Portal's story is universally loved.

Well now I hate it just to maintain the validity of my point.

And I chuckled at your immediate serious response to Cheez's post contrasted with my smart ass one.

[Biotic Sage]

AdmiralCheez wrote...

Biotic Sage wrote...

Well I think we've established that in terms of the Catalyst and the final decision, the level of suck is subjective, because you think there are high levels of suck and I think there are low levels.  And you don't need to write novels to appreciate writing, the more important thing is to read a lot.  The more frames of reference you have the better.  ME3's ending isn't universally hated (as some on these boards seem to think).  It's vocally hated, which is not the same thing.  Nor is it universally loved, obviously, but I have yet to see a book, game, movie, etc. that is universally either loathed or loved.

Okay agreed, but seriously, why do you like it?  All of the stuff you've cited in this thread seems to relate to authorial intent and symbolism.  As far as I can tell, you like it for what it's supposed to be.

Unfortunately, "supposed to" just doesn't do it for me.

I thought I told you?  I thought about it and I liked it.  It's not in my nature to have an immediate emotional response to something like the ME ending, so that was never an issue for me.  I did have a great emotional response to the final goodbye between Shep and the squad in London, so I did get what you called the nice immediate response and the pleasant aftertaste.

[Galbrant]

Wow that image of EDI's cameltoe is burned and seared into my mind. Thank's a lot, Admiral Cheese.But damn do you have a point.

[Indy_S]

AdmiralCheez wrote...

Okay agreed, but seriously, why do you like it?  All of the stuff you've cited in this thread seems to relate to authorial intent and symbolism.  As far as I can tell, you like it for what it's supposed to be.

Unfortunately, "supposed to" just doesn't do it for me.

Yeah, I can make some leaps but divorcing it from its literal self is too much for me. I can see what is was meant to be (I think), but that doesn't make me like it.

And teeheehee. Everyone loves Portal. It's my goto for gaming perfection.

[AdmiralCheez]

Biotic Sage wrote...

I thought I told you?  I thought about it and I liked it.  It's not in my nature to have an immediate emotional response to something like the ME ending, so that was never an issue for me.  I did have a great emotional response to the final goodbye between Shep and the squad in London, so I did get what you called the nice immediate response and the pleasant aftertaste.

Real talk?  Farewells to old squaddies = awesome.

But "I thought about it and liked it" still doesn't make a lot of sense.  I mean, I thought about ovarian cysts once.  Doesn't mean I'd like to get some of my own or anything.

PS I hate Portal.

PPS Just kidding.

PPPS Seriously how could anyone not like Portal?

Modifié par AdmiralCheez, 22 février 2013 - 10:33 .

[Dean_the_Young]

Indy_S wrote...

Biotic Sage wrote...

Well let's take it one step further and say that ME1 is responsible for the mess.  It introduced god-like, unstoppable Reapers into the mix.  How do solve this problem?  Not by fighting them and winning, because that would undermine their appeal and make them seem wimpy in retrospect.  Not by losing to them, because we still want to feel heroic.  How then, other than with a Crucible?

By changing the win condition. I'd make it not about killing them and instead about keeping them out. Put up some kind of bubble around the galaxy so nothing can get in or out. That sounds really stupid, I know, but it's an example of where this could have gone. Fighting Sovereign was about keeping them out, Arrival was about keeping them out. It could be pulled off.

Alternately, running away. Flee through some kind of mega relay to another galaxy. Have a war about getting as many people or pieces of technology through as possible. At the end, destroy the mega relay to prevent the Reapers from following. This one even sets up a Brave New World thing for sequels to follow up on.

Or here's a third means: negotiation. If the Reapers have some all-important priority they're trying to make real, we might compel them to suspend their harvest by threatening that objective.

If it were, say, Dark Energy, then (helpfully justified by optimal war assets) we thraten to prolong the war until the Dark Energy buildup reaches the tipping point: only by making peace and helping us will we not destroy the Reaper's goal of, well, not seeing a civilizaation pass the point of no return.

If it's the technological singularity of a synthetic menace, then we threaten to activate the AI-singularity we've built and hidden somewhere else in the galaxy (or outside of it), which we've programmed to reverse engineer captured Reaper tech (such as the Collector base), surpass it, and basically become a synthetic force that will surpass the Reapers to the extent that not even they could stop it.

etc..

[Biotic Sage]

AdmiralCheez wrote...

Biotic Sage wrote...

I thought I told you?  I thought about it and I liked it.  It's not in my nature to have an immediate emotional response to something like the ME ending, so that was never an issue for me.  I did have a great emotional response to the final goodbye between Shep and the squad in London, so I did get what you called the nice immediate response and the pleasant aftertaste.

Real talk?  Farewells to old squaddies = awesome.

But "I thought about it and liked it" still doesn't make a lot of sense.  I mean, I thought about ovarian cysts once.  Doesn't mean I'd like to get some of my own or anything.

Hahaha true.  I just didn't want to seem redundant because I thought I'd covered my line of thinking.  I liked the reveal for the Reaper's "motivation."  I like that it was because of a misguided super-intelligence (now confirmed to be an AI by Leviathan; I had always guessed AI but the original cut could have "god-like entity" as just as valid of conclusion) having false assumptions about singularity.  I liked that the choices were nuanced in that each of them has an underlying implication about what you as the player think about this Intelligence's assumptions and viewpoint.  I liked the bittersweet heroic sacrifice that Shepard makes, I think it fits his hero's journey.  To that end, I don't like the breath scene, because it undermines that, but I didn't get the breath scene on my first playthrough; I wasn't aware of its existence for a while. 

Modifié par Biotic Sage, 22 février 2013 - 10:37 .

[Dr_Extrem]

on the gender thing again



quod erat demonstrandum

[Biotic Sage]

Dean_the_Young wrote...

Or here's a third means: negotiation. If the Reapers have some all-important priority they're trying to make real, we might compel them to suspend their harvest by threatening that objective.

If it were, say, Dark Energy, then (helpfully justified by optimal war assets) we thraten to prolong the war until the Dark Energy buildup reaches the tipping point: only by making peace and helping us will we not destroy the Reaper's goal of, well, not seeing a civilizaation pass the point of no return.

If it's the technological singularity of a synthetic menace, then we threaten to activate the AI-singularity we've built and hidden somewhere else in the galaxy (or outside of it), which we've programmed to reverse engineer captured Reaper tech (such as the Collector base), surpass it, and basically become a synthetic force that will surpass the Reapers to the extent that not even they could stop it.

etc..

To the first: You mean like threatening galactic suicide?  Like, we say, "If you keep reapin' us, then we're killing ourselves AND all unintelligent organic life so that you have nothing left to maintain.  Then you've failed in your goal to maintain organic life!"  haha  They'd be like, "You won't do that," and we'd be like, "you feelin' lucky punk?" while pointing the figurative gun at ourselves.  Absurd, but I guess that is a solution.

[daaaav]

Biotic Sage wrote...

daaaav wrote...

Biotic Sage wrote...

Lizardviking wrote...

The root of the problem with the catalyst scene is the fact that Shepard just accepts and surrenders to the Catalyst's logic and demands, a problem that still remains in the EC. The Catalyst wanted a new solution, and Shepard as the hero should have given him one, one that is not based on these insane choices.

So pretend your Shepard, and the Catalyst has just gotten done talking to you.  What would you do?  What "new solution" is there other than the ones the Crucible facilitates?  I'm not being sarcastic, I'd genuinely be interested to know.

I'm afraid that we would have to depend on the authors for that bit of inspiration. The catalyst alone isn't responsible for this mess. The crucibile is just as guilty.

Well let's take it one step further and say that ME1 is responsible for the mess.  It introduced god-like, unstoppable Reapers into the mix.  How do solve this problem?  Not by fighting them and winning, because that would undermine their appeal and make them seem wimpy in retrospect.  Not by losing to them, because we still want to feel heroic.  How then, other than with a Crucible?

Yes you could. I would say that the problems discussed in this thread are decidedly more thematic in nature rather than narrative. 

[Biotic Sage]

Dr_Extrem wrote...

on the gender thing again



quod erat demonstrandum

You could do the same thing with Male Shep and see his guns get increasingly more Schwartzenageresque.  At least we can justify this with working out and a fair amount of steroids...not sure what the boob lift justification is haha.

Modifié par Biotic Sage, 22 février 2013 - 10:42 .

[Tyrannosaurus Rex]

Biotic Sage wrote...

Lizardviking wrote...

The root of the problem with the catalyst scene is the fact that Shepard just accepts and surrenders to the Catalyst's logic and demands, a problem that still remains in the EC. The Catalyst wanted a new solution, and Shepard as the hero should have given him one, one that is not based on these insane choices.

So pretend your Shepard, and the Catalyst has just gotten done talking to you.  What would you do?  What "new solution" is there other than the ones the Crucible facilitates?  I'm not being sarcastic, I'd genuinely be interested to know.

I was thinking a compromise would be met. If you managed to create peace on Rannoch, Shepard convinces the Catalyst and the Reapers just to leave, nothing more. Organics have already proven we can resist against a superior force and build the crucible, so if there ever will be some sort of major AI uprising threatning us. We will just build a new crucible, pop that sucker in the Citadel and blow the synthethics sky-high.

[Dr_Extrem]

Biotic Sage wrote...

Dr_Extrem wrote...

on the gender thing again



quod erat demonstrandum

You could do the same thing with Male Shep and see his guns get increasingly more Schwartzenageresque.  At least we can justify this with working out and a fair amount of steroids...not sure what the boob lift justification is haha.

together with edis ... "youknowwhatimean", ashs "boxerlips" and the rest, it is clear, who the target-audience was.

[Biotic Sage]

Lizardviking wrote...

Biotic Sage wrote...

Lizardviking wrote...

The root of the problem with the catalyst scene is the fact that Shepard just accepts and surrenders to the Catalyst's logic and demands, a problem that still remains in the EC. The Catalyst wanted a new solution, and Shepard as the hero should have given him one, one that is not based on these insane choices.

So pretend your Shepard, and the Catalyst has just gotten done talking to you.  What would you do?  What "new solution" is there other than the ones the Crucible facilitates?  I'm not being sarcastic, I'd genuinely be interested to know.

I was thinking a compromise would be met. If you managed to create peace on Rannoch, Shepard convinces the Catalyst and the Reapers just to leave, nothing more. Organics have already proven we can resist against a superior force and build the crucible, so if there ever will be some sort of major AI uprising threatning us. We will just build a new crucible, pop that sucker in the Citadel and blow the synthethics sky-high.

Unfortunately the peace on Rannoch doesn't prove anything.  It proves that organics and synthetics can cooperate.  It doesn't disprove the Catalyst's maintained view that eventual genocide is inevitable.  The Catalyst's response would be: "Just because they are cooperating today, doesn't mean that they'll cooperate tomorrow."

And you'd have to get the Crucible to the Citadel before they blow it up.  That's hard to do, so it's hard to threaten them with that.

[Indy_S]

As a counter-point, Ashley's lips didn't actually change size. It might be a layer of lip-gloss or something.

[AdmiralCheez]

Biotic Sage wrote...

Hahaha true.  I just didn't want to seem redundant because I thought I'd covered my line of thinking.  I liked the reveal for the Reaper's "motivation."  I like that it was because of a misguided super-intelligence (now confirmed to be an AI by Leviathan; I had always guessed AI but the original cut could have "god-like entity" as just as valid of conclusion) having false assumptions about singularity.  I liked that the choices were nuanced in that each of them has an underlying implication about what you as the player think about this Intelligence's assumptions and viewpoint.  I liked the bittersweet heroic sacrifice that Shepard makes, I think it fits his hero's journey.  To that end, I don't like the breath scene, because it undermines that, but I didn't get the breath scene on my first playthrough.

Yeah, still wasn't clear to me.  Anyway, allow me to dissect your sentiments...

The AI: I really liked the idea of Reapers having individual wills and personalities.  Making them slaves to a higher power cheapened the memory of Harby and Sov in my mind.  That said, a master controller undermines one of Sov's iconic lines: "We are each a nation, independent, free of all weakness."

Motivation: I expected the Reapers to have some sort of core ideology that was subtly misguided, but what we got?  Synthetics that periodically wipe out organics so organics don't create synthetics to wipe out organics?  Leviathan made this a little better in some ways and a little worse in others.  But seriously, of all the motives they could've picked, they went with the one involving circular reasoning.

Choices: Underlying implications aside, all options force you to agree with the Catalyst on some level (even Refuse just lets the Cycle continue).  In addition, each one also tacks on a horrific war crime on top of it.  I'm pretty sure you've read at least one of the bajillion threads about this, so I'll move right along.

Shepard's Death: Expected, and I'm okay with it.  However, in a game about player choice, I think we should've gotten more than just a breath from the "Shepard lives" ending.  Also, how Shepard dies in all three/four endings is just... stupid.  Voluntary suicide, going on the word of a self-titled Lord of All Reapers.

Anyway, I respect your opinion and you're totally allowed to like the ending if you want to.  Meanwhile, I'm just going to sit back and use ME3 as a learning experience on how not to conclude a trilogy.

[ZLurps]

Indy_S wrote...

Biotic Sage wrote...

Well let's take it one step further and say that ME1 is responsible for the mess.  It introduced god-like, unstoppable Reapers into the mix.  How do solve this problem?  Not by fighting them and winning, because that would undermine their appeal and make them seem wimpy in retrospect.  Not by losing to them, because we still want to feel heroic.  How then, other than with a Crucible?

By changing the win condition. I'd make it not about killing them and instead about keeping them out. Put up some kind of bubble around the galaxy so nothing can get in or out. That sounds really stupid, I know, but it's an example of where this could have gone. Fighting Sovereign was about keeping them out, Arrival was about keeping them out. It could be pulled off.

Alternately, running away. Flee through some kind of mega relay to another galaxy. Have a war about getting as many people or pieces of technology through as possible. At the end, destroy the mega relay to prevent the Reapers from following. This one even sets up a Brave New World thing for sequels to follow up on.

Yep, there are different ways to deal with scenario. The big part of ME3 is civilisations reaction to war, we see a lot of that on the Citadel, which is IMO one of the best things I have seen in game media. You need almost almighty enemy to make that scenario work.

By using existing pieces in lore, they could have left Reapers somewhat more autonomous, very arrogant but preserving also parts of consciouses of harvested races in they form and because current cycle was about 2000 years too late, use that to give galaxy some time to discover, new tech, let's call it Krusiple.

Krusible, wouldn't be as powerful and conveniet as Crusible, it simply could cause Reaper nanides to malfunction for a short period of time, on full head to head scenario Reapers would still win, no matter what, but as they see themselves not only as pinnacle of evolution, but also preservers of life in virtual form, they face scenario where they actually need to consider their position. How much loss of (from their perspective) unique life can be sacrifaced in this war? Maybe we wouldn't win per se, but Reaper's just withdraw back into dark space.

Another possibility, if Central AI angle is used would be making an expedition via Citadel relay, since Reaper's used that during previous cycles to enter in galaxy, there needs to be a counterpart for it in the dark space. Would make sense to send stealth ship like Normandy on yet one more suicide mission to enter Citadel's counterpart and any sort of HAL scenario could be played there, finally disabling the Reapers if player is succesful.


This is off topic but I gotta say....

Billions of years old AI that have Reaper nanides, Reaper ships, but never it came to think that back up might be handy. LOL.

[Biotic Sage]

Dr_Extrem wrote...

together with edis ... "youknowwhatimean", ashs "boxerlips" and the rest, it is clear, who the target-audience was.

From a business standpoint it makes sense.  15-25 year old males like that kind of thing; it's very little expended effort on a game developer's part to rev their engines.  Sad, but that's the way it is.  The women need to play more games and be more vocal if we want to see some more, um, enlightened content.

[Indy_S]

Biotic Sage wrote...

Unfortunately the peace on Rannoch doesn't prove anything.  It proves that organics and synthetics can cooperate.  It doesn't disprove the Catalyst's maintained view that eventual genocide is inevitable.  The Catalyst's response would be: "Just because they are cooperating today, doesn't mean that they'll cooperate tomorrow."

And you'd have to get the Crucible to the Citadel before they blow it up.  That's hard to do, so it's hard to threaten them with that.

Eventual. I hate that word because of it's misuse. Alongside 'inevitable', it creates absolutes. Logic dislikes absolutes because it requires leaps to reach them. The Catalyst's logic takes a leap from 'it happened a lot' to 'it happens every time'. There is no proof that they will always come into conflict. Furthermore, there has never been an instance of the utter destruction of all organics. Its logic is broken. It would be nice to be able to show it this.

[AdmiralCheez]

Biotic Sage wrote...

From a business standpoint it makes sense.  15-25 year old males like that kind of thing; it's very little expended effort on a game developer's part to rev their engines.  Sad, but that's the way it is.  The women need to play more games and be more vocal if we want to see some more, um, enlightened content.

COULD YOU JUST

STOP

OKAY LISTEN

Sexing up all the female characters is a turn-off for potential female gamers.  The more objectification there is, the less likely a girl is to show interest in the game.  So it remains a boys' club.

Now, what if girls buy games anyway?  Then sales go up, and the publishers assume they can just keep doing what they're doing.

Being vocal is great--and I am vocal as hell--but ultimately it's something the publishers have to fix themselves.

[FlyinElk212]

Anti-diversity message?

I guess that depends on whether or not you truly consider synthetics a race. If you do, then hasn't Bioware technically accomplished EXACTLY what they wanted to accomplish within the player?

[78stonewobble]

Biotic Sage wrote...
I thought I told you?  I thought about it and I liked it.  It's not in my nature to have an immediate emotional response to something like the ME ending, so that was never an issue for me.  I did have a great emotional response to the final goodbye between Shep and the squad in London, so I did get what you called the nice immediate response and the pleasant aftertaste.

Well I'd say that the fact that the ending itself failed to illicit an emotional response, compaired to other parts of the game, is evidence in itself that the ending was subpar.



More generally: Yes yes there are alot of voluptuous women in the game. Too many for my taste, but please remember that some women DO look like that. Personally I'd prefer a somewhat representative group.

Modifié par 78stonewobble, 22 février 2013 - 11:02 .

[ZLurps]

Biotic Sage wrote...

Dr_Extrem wrote...

together with edis ... "youknowwhatimean", ashs "boxerlips" and the rest, it is clear, who the target-audience was.

From a business standpoint it makes sense.  15-25 year old males like that kind of thing; it's very little expended effort on a game developer's part to rev their engines.  Sad, but that's the way it is.  The women need to play more games and be more vocal if we want to see some more, um, enlightened content.

Business may think it works but it really doesn't work like it used to. Internet has brought access to that sort of content for practically everyone who plays games (Internet connection required).

Times change, I read that in the past introducing Seven of Nine in ST: Voyager actually gained some audience for the series, but at these days, when new BSG tried the same trick, even went to have orgies on Cylon base star, it didn't helped them one bit but audience kept abandoning the show.