346 réponses à ce sujet

[Giantdeathrobot]

Robhuzz wrote...



Oh I don't even mind if there are really, really bad endings, as long as there's at least one ending that is actually good and I can choose that one.

I wonder though.... is this really, really, really bad ending bad as in.... everyone dies bad or just mass effect 3 bad as in crappy writing?

Na, Dishonored's good ending is good as in your actions have positive consequences. I found that it was a bit too happy myself, but to each their own. It doesn't make any leap of logic.

The ''bad', ending is subject to a lot more interpretation, in a good way; basically, without spoiling, it brings about a lot of change. Whenever that change is good or bad is up to the player, but it's nowhere near the nonsense that ME3's ending is. As someone else said, it's fitting I think. Point is, both endings are well made and good conclusions to a great game.

Other games with well made endings, off the top of my head;

-Read Dead Redemption, very sad but oh so fitting.
-Planescape Torment, the best ending is still tragic but very fulfilling
-Dragon Age Origins, many choices and a strong epilogue.
-Bioshock 2, it was nice to see your actions affect Eleanor in a logical way.
-Batman: Arkham City. Needs to be played to understand.
-Deus Ex, also very fitting with the game's tone.

Note that none of those are cliche happy endings, they all have some amount of tragedy (save for the Bioshock 2 good ending I guess). But the important thing is, they are well executed and don't shatter the player's suspension of disbelief in a thousand pieces.

As for Bioshock Infinite, I haven't read the spoiler, and I'll see for myself before jumping to conclusions.

[galland]

crimzontearz wrote...

galland wrote...

crimzontearz wrote...

galland wrote...

I did not expect to come onto the ME forums and hit spoilers about Bioshock!(which I have preordered!)Thanks a bunch.

can you not read???

If I could not read,why would I be here?Or can this be obtained in Braille? Where in the thread title does it mention any other game spoilers or no?!
And just as an aside..........why the rudeness???

rhetorical question flew over your head? The first post says clearly "Bioshock infinite spoilers" why would you read any further if you do not want to be spoiled?

Sarcasm flew over your head?I referred to the Thread title not  the first post Or can't you read?

[Robhuzz]

Giantdeathrobot wrote...

Robhuzz wrote...



Oh I don't even mind if there are really, really bad endings, as long as there's at least one ending that is actually good and I can choose that one.

I wonder though.... is this really, really, really bad ending bad as in.... everyone dies bad or just mass effect 3 bad as in crappy writing?

Na, Dishonored's good ending is good as in your actions have positive consequences. I found that it was a bit too happy myself, but to each their own. It doesn't make any leap of logic.

The ''bad', ending is subject to a lot more interpretation, in a good way; basically, without spoiling, it brings about a lot of change. Whenever that change is good or bad is up to the player, but it's nowhere near the nonsense that ME3's ending is. As someone else said, it's fitting I think. Point is, both endings are well made and good conclusions to a great game.

Other games with well made endings, off the top of my head;

-Read Dead Redemption, very sad but oh so fitting.
-Planescape Torment, the best ending is still tragic but very fulfilling
-Dragon Age Origins, many choices and a strong epilogue.
-Bioshock 2, it was nice to see your actions affect Eleanor in a logical way.
-Batman: Arkham City. Needs to be played to understand.
-Deus Ex, also very fitting with the game's tone.

Note that none of those are cliche happy endings, they all have some amount of tragedy (save for the Bioshock 2 good ending I guess). But the important thing is, they are well executed and don't shatter the player's suspension of disbelief in a thousand pieces.

As for Bioshock Infinite, I haven't read the spoiler, and I'll see for myself before jumping to conclusions.

I think Dragon Age Origins executed that perfectly. Sure one of the endings was a cliche 'hero lives and gets his girl' ending but if you wanted that ending then it was your choice. No one was pushed into an ending they didn't want. And even though the tone of the game was generally quite dark, I thought it was very fitting. It didn't break the suspension of disbelief either - though that is admittedly quite hard in a fantasy game.

Deus Ex - particularly Human Revolution - does seem to be getting a fair bit of hate over its ending but though it reminded me about ME3's a bit, it actually fit the style of that game. Deus ex isn't science fiction either so stuff like what was shown there goes for that theme. I do get the feeling that *very light spoilers for Deus EX: HR below*

the game was trying to push you into destroying the project, thus killing everyone aboard the facility, including Jensen. The epilogue afterwards didn't talk about jensen once, it was just about the world. It was as if they pushed for Jensen to die there.

Modifié par Robhuzz, 22 mars 2013 - 10:10 .

[Xamufam]

Dr_Extrem wrote...

this only cements by standpoint:

"if you cant write deep and interesting endings/plot twists, stick to simple but working."


not everybody is a master writer - thats not a problem but you should stick to what you can and know your limits. simple, slightly hollywoodian endings are ok - not deep, meaningful or special - but they are easier to make, easier to believe and they work.

the suspension of disbelief must not be broken. the player only accepts a certain ammount of bs before he quits. this limit is off course very individual and you cant please everybody - but you should not scratch the borders of this limit and play save, if a whole series depends on it.

better save than sorry.


the writers of game-stories have to keep in mind, that we are hardcore, freaks and a lot of us have a scientific background. you cant bombard us with too much nonsense without driving us away.

Rules about endings

In learning how to end your novel with a punch, it’s important to know what you can and can’t
do to write success novel endings that attract agents, publishers and,
most important, readers. Here are the dos and don’ts of writing a strong
closer.

Don’t introduce any new characters or subplots. Any appearances within the last 50 pages should have been foreshadowed earlier, even if mysteriously.

Don’t describe, muse, explain or philosophize. Keep description to a minimum, but maximize action and conflict. You have placed all your charges. Now, light the fuse and run.

Do create that sense of Oh, wow!
Your best novelties and biggest surprises should go here. Readers love
it when some early, trivial detail plays a part in the finale. One or
more of those things need to show up here as decisive elements.

Do enmesh your reader deeply in the outcome.
Get her so involved that she cannot put down your novel to go to bed,
to work or even to the bathroom until she sees how it turns out.

DO Resolve the central conflict.
You don’t have to provide a happily-ever-after ending, but do try to
uplift. Readers want to be uplifted, and editors try to give readers
what they want.

Do Afford redemption to your heroic character.
No matter how many mistakes she has made along the way, allow the
reader—and the character—to realize that, in the end, she has done the
right thing.

Do Tie up loose ends of significance.
Every question you planted in a reader’s mind should be addressed, even
if the answer is to say that a character will address that issue later,
after the book ends.

Do Mirror your final words to events in your opener. When you begin a journey of writing a novel,
already having established a destination, it’s much easier to make
calculated detours, twists and turns in your storytelling tactics. When
you reach the ending, go back to ensure some element in each of your
complications will point to it. It’s the tie-back tactic. You don’t have
to telegraph the finish. Merely create a feeling that the final words
hearken to an earlier moment in the story.

Don’t change voice, tone or attitude.
An ending will feel tacked on if the voice of the narrator suddenly
sounds alien to the voice that’s been consistent for the previous 80,000
words.

Don’t resort to gimmicks. No quirky
twists or trick endings. You’re at the end of your story, and if your
reader has stuck with you the whole time, it’s because you’ve engaged
her, because she has participated. The final impression you want to
create is a positive one. Don’t leave your reader feeling tricked or
cheated.

Modifié par Troxa, 22 mars 2013 - 10:31 .

[Archonsg]

DEM : HR was supposed to be a prequel to DEM (1984) if I remember the events right.
The disappointment I believe stem from just how similar the game ending is to the 1984 version.

To put it in perspective, its like Bioware releasing "First Contact War" and at the end you get 3 choices, 1) Control : Accept a deal to allow your adjutant to become a puppet governor for the Turian Hierarchy if you shoot yourself in the head 2) Synthesis : Kill yourself and accept a deal that would integrated the System Alliance into the Turian Hierarchy 3) Destroy : made your entire fleet make a suicide ramming run into the Turian fleet forcing a ceasefire from the Turian Hierarchy after the loss of one of its fleet.

[crimzontearz]

galland wrote...

crimzontearz wrote...

galland wrote...

crimzontearz wrote...

galland wrote...

I did not expect to come onto the ME forums and hit spoilers about Bioshock!(which I have preordered!)Thanks a bunch.

can you not read???

If I could not read,why would I be here?Or can this be obtained in Braille? Where in the thread title does it mention any other game spoilers or no?!
And just as an aside..........why the rudeness???

rhetorical question flew over your head? The first post says clearly "Bioshock infinite spoilers" why would you read any further if you do not want to be spoiled?

Sarcasm flew over your head?I referred to the Thread title not  the first post Or can't you read?

yes I am aware it is not in the thread title but it is in the first post and the spoilers are in an external link so why the **** are you complaining

[crimzontearz]

Troxa wrote...

Dr_Extrem wrote...

this only cements by standpoint:

"if you cant write deep and interesting endings/plot twists, stick to simple but working."


not everybody is a master writer - thats not a problem but you should stick to what you can and know your limits. simple, slightly hollywoodian endings are ok - not deep, meaningful or special - but they are easier to make, easier to believe and they work.

the suspension of disbelief must not be broken. the player only accepts a certain ammount of bs before he quits. this limit is off course very individual and you cant please everybody - but you should not scratch the borders of this limit and play save, if a whole series depends on it.

better save than sorry.


the writers of game-stories have to keep in mind, that we are hardcore, freaks and a lot of us have a scientific background. you cant bombard us with too much nonsense without driving us away.

Rules about endings

In learning how to end your novel with a punch, it’s important to know what you can and can’t
do to write success novel endings that attract agents, publishers and,
most important, readers. Here are the dos and don’ts of writing a strong
closer.

Don’t introduce any new characters or subplots. Any appearances within the last 50 pages should have been foreshadowed earlier, even if mysteriously.

Don’t describe, muse, explain or philosophize. Keep description to a minimum, but maximize action and conflict. You have placed all your charges. Now, light the fuse and run.

Do create that sense of Oh, wow!
Your best novelties and biggest surprises should go here. Readers love
it when some early, trivial detail plays a part in the finale. One or
more of those things need to show up here as decisive elements.

Do enmesh your reader deeply in the outcome.
Get her so involved that she cannot put down your novel to go to bed,
to work or even to the bathroom until she sees how it turns out.

DO Resolve the central conflict.
You don’t have to provide a happily-ever-after ending, but do try to
uplift. Readers want to be uplifted, and editors try to give readers
what they want.

Do Afford redemption to your heroic character.
No matter how many mistakes she has made along the way, allow the
reader—and the character—to realize that, in the end, she has done the
right thing.

Do Tie up loose ends of significance.
Every question you planted in a reader’s mind should be addressed, even
if the answer is to say that a character will address that issue later,
after the book ends.

Do Mirror your final words to events in your opener. When you begin a journey of writing a novel,
already having established a destination, it’s much easier to make
calculated detours, twists and turns in your storytelling tactics. When
you reach the ending, go back to ensure some element in each of your
complications will point to it. It’s the tie-back tactic. You don’t have
to telegraph the finish. Merely create a feeling that the final words
hearken to an earlier moment in the story.

Don’t change voice, tone or attitude.
An ending will feel tacked on if the voice of the narrator suddenly
sounds alien to the voice that’s been consistent for the previous 80,000
words.

Don’t resort to gimmicks. No quirky
twists or trick endings. You’re at the end of your story, and if your
reader has stuck with you the whole time, it’s because you’ve engaged
her, because she has participated. The final impression you want to
create is a positive one. Don’t leave your reader feeling tricked or
cheated.

lol the writers of Crysis 3 must have followed this pretty much to the letter especially a few of these points shine through (the orbital fall to ling shang, Lawrence's face....they call me prophet"

[MegaSovereign]

Alcatraz got really screwed over in the Crysis trilogy.

[Eckswhyzed]

NCommand wrote...

Personally I find it great that video games are moving away from the "Hero shoots badguy, badguy dies, victory!" endings that have become the staple of the industry, not saying they all should change, but I like my variation

Amen to that.

I am very optimistic about the future of video game storytelling, even in the supposedly ruined 'AAA' game space. 

[Iakus]

Archonsg wrote...

DEM : HR was supposed to be a prequel to DEM (1984) if I remember the events right.
The disappointment I believe stem from just how similar the game ending is to the 1984 version.

To put it in perspective, its like Bioware releasing "First Contact War" and at the end you get 3 choices, 1) Control : Accept a deal to allow your adjutant to become a puppet governor for the Turian Hierarchy if you shoot yourself in the head 2) Synthesis : Kill yourself and accept a deal that would integrated the System Alliance into the Turian Hierarchy 3) Destroy : made your entire fleet make a suicide ramming run into the Turian fleet forcing a ceasefire from the Turian Hierarchy after the loss of one of its fleet.

Actually, the original Deus Ex came out in 2000

And it's kind of understandable that there's a certain sameness to all the endings in that one, since, as you said, it's a prequel, so certain events have to proceed to maintain continuity with past games' continuity (a big reason why many people don't want prequels to teh ME games)

However, the grumbling (I think) mainly comes from having your ending come from simply pushing a button at the very end.  Nothing you did at any point inthe game really mattered beyond putting you in that place to make that choice (sound familiar?)

In the original Deus Ex, the entire final level was Denton making a choice.  You are given three missions from three different characters which are all mutually exclusive.  You end the game by completing one of those three objectives.  It was far more involved than pushing a button, or shooting a pipe, or assuming a crucifix position as you dive into a beam of green space magic...

[Giantdeathrobot]

iakus wrote...

[

Actually, the original Deus Ex came out in 2000

And it's kind of understandable that there's a certain sameness to all the endings in that one, since, as you said, it's a prequel, so certain events have to proceed to maintain continuity with past games' continuity (a big reason why many people don't want prequels to teh ME games)

However, the grumbling (I think) mainly comes from having your ending come from simply pushing a button at the very end.  Nothing you did at any point inthe game really mattered beyond putting you in that place to make that choice (sound familiar?)

In the original Deus Ex, the entire final level was Denton making a choice.  You are given three missions from three different characters which are all mutually exclusive.  You end the game by completing one of those three objectives.  It was far more involved than pushing a button, or shooting a pipe, or assuming a crucifix position as you dive into a beam of green space magic...

It was a bit of a let down mechanically (the HR ending). The whole of the Project should have foreshadowed/led to one of the endings, certainly. But what it didn't do is introduce a new conflict and ask to solve it in 5 damn minutes. All 4 endings were perfectly in line with the game's tone, and it's not like they could change that much because of the prequel thing (which was a bit of a mistake imo). So Human Revolution's ending may not be as good as Deus Ex 1's, but it's fine by me, and the rest of the game is great enough to make up for it.

Oh, and someone mentionned Alpha Protocol. Good catch. The sheer number of variations are mind-boggling, from standard ride-into-the-sunset heroism to the protagonist becoming the most powerful man of the planet behind the scenes.

[crimzontearz]

MegaSovereign wrote...

Alcatraz got really screwed over in the Crysis trilogy.

well him and Lawrence and SECOND are now prophet so.....

oh and Alcatraz is still alive

[MegaSovereign]

crimzontearz wrote...

MegaSovereign wrote...

Alcatraz got really screwed over in the Crysis trilogy.

well him and Lawrence and SECOND are now prophet so.....

oh and Alcatraz is still alive

I played Crysis 2 and watched Crysis 3's ending.

I also heard Alcatraz isn't mentioned much in the 3rd game.

By the end of the 2nd game, his body got hijacked by the suit and Lawrence.

[Iakus]

Giantdeathrobot wrote...

It was a bit of a let down mechanically (the HR ending). The whole of the Project should have foreshadowed/led to one of the endings, certainly. But what it didn't do is introduce a new conflict and ask to solve it in 5 damn minutes. All 4 endings were perfectly in line with the game's tone, and it's not like they could change that much because of the prequel thing (which was a bit of a mistake imo). So Human Revolution's ending may not be as good as Deus Ex 1's, but it's fine by me, and the rest of the game is great enough to make up for it.

Right, mechanically disappointing (push button to win) but functionally, it was asking you to comment on everything you have observed in the game (perhaps all the games) about human augmentation.  The thought behind it fit, even if the execution wasn't great.
 

Oh, and someone mentionned Alpha Protocol. Good catch. The sheer number of variations are mind-boggling, from standard ride-into-the-sunset heroism to the protagonist becoming the most powerful man of the planet behind the scenes.

That was me

And yeah, you can ride off into the sunset with the girl, be pretty much the" last man standing", join forces with the villain, screw everyone and take over everything yourself.

And that doesn't even count the news reports, that play during the closing commenting  on your activities throughout the world and their consequences.

[txgoldrush]

Wow....actually it makes sense..."When Will the Circle Be Unbroken" was Bioshock Infinite's song.

ME3's ending, the extended cut, is hated because the fanbase wants to be ignorant. To ignore the narrative that leads up to the ending, or the "not so feel good" themes such as sacrifice, finality, and loss or interpet the ending in a way that is never supposed to be interpeted as such.

The original cut failed because it failed to thematically connect the ending to the rest of the narrative....the extended cut however, does.

ME3's main theme was "victory throguh sacrifice" and sacrifice was needed to activate the Crucible...plain and simple.

[txgoldrush]

Giantdeathrobot wrote...

iakus wrote...

[

Actually, the original Deus Ex came out in 2000

And it's kind of understandable that there's a certain sameness to all the endings in that one, since, as you said, it's a prequel, so certain events have to proceed to maintain continuity with past games' continuity (a big reason why many people don't want prequels to teh ME games)

However, the grumbling (I think) mainly comes from having your ending come from simply pushing a button at the very end.  Nothing you did at any point inthe game really mattered beyond putting you in that place to make that choice (sound familiar?)

In the original Deus Ex, the entire final level was Denton making a choice.  You are given three missions from three different characters which are all mutually exclusive.  You end the game by completing one of those three objectives.  It was far more involved than pushing a button, or shooting a pipe, or assuming a crucifix position as you dive into a beam of green space magic...

It was a bit of a let down mechanically (the HR ending). The whole of the Project should have foreshadowed/led to one of the endings, certainly. But what it didn't do is introduce a new conflict and ask to solve it in 5 damn minutes. All 4 endings were perfectly in line with the game's tone, and it's not like they could change that much because of the prequel thing (which was a bit of a mistake imo). So Human Revolution's ending may not be as good as Deus Ex 1's, but it's fine by me, and the rest of the game is great enough to make up for it.

Oh, and someone mentionned Alpha Protocol. Good catch. The sheer number of variations are mind-boggling, from standard ride-into-the-sunset heroism to the protagonist becoming the most powerful man of the planet behind the scenes.

There is no "new conflict" introduced in the last five minutes....you simply were not paying attention...the conflict between organcis and synthetics, an dbigger in scope, created vs creators existed all series long.

Hell, play "Signal Tracking" from ME1 again and then tell me there is no conflict between organics and synthetics.....

[daaaav]

txgoldrush wrote...


There is no "new conflict" introduced in the last five minutes....you simply were not paying attention...the conflict between organcis and synthetics, an dbigger in scope, created vs creators existed all series long.

Hell, play "Signal Tracking" from ME1 again and then tell me there is no conflict between organics and synthetics.....

This is cherry picking and you know it.

What analogues are you drawing between the conflicts between organics and synthetics and creators vs created? It would not have mattered one bit in terms of narrative coherence if the Geth were organic creations of the quarians. This is because the only reason we are given to believe that there may be an irreconcilable conflict between organics and synthetics is a minor quest in the first game. Thats it! There's nothing else!

[L_B_123]

quote]elitecom wrote...

I haven't played any of the Bioshock games but with this quote from the designer : 

"The end of the game.... It's like nothing you've actually experienced in a video game before" 

Now, where have I heard something like that before? Looks like Bioshock Infinte may be a contender to Mass Effect 3 after all.

Source: www.eurogamer.net/articles/2012-12-18-levine-bioshock-infinite-ending-like-nothing-youve-experienced-in-a-video-game-before

[/quote]

the difference is I feel more inclined to believe Ken is telling the truth than Casey, I have yet to see Ken actually lie like the horror of ME3. Though many things sound bad until experienced.

[Applepie_Svk]

txgoldrush wrote...

ME3's ending, the extended cut, is hated because the fanbase wants to be ignorant. To ignore the narrative that leads up to the ending, or the "not so feel good" themes such as sacrifice, finality, and loss or interpet the ending in a way that is never supposed to be interpeted as such.

And here we go again - YO NO LIKE ENDING COZ IT´S SAD-, you would be surprised but I love sad endings, I love endings where hero dies but it has to be done well and not in such a stupid way as with ME3. To begin with ME3 failed right at first step with Crucible, logic and disbelief saying simply that Crucible was created either by Catalyst or Leviathans which is why are endings crap. So, I will tell you what is ME3 - it´s literally mess. 

Till the release of Leviathan, there was almost not a single foreshadowing - only one line said by Vendetta and that´s not how you´re making a proper foreshadowing, then came out Leviathan as DLC which should be already in game if you wanted to foreshadow something properly.

And again ... there is difference betwen "self-sacrifice" and "being sacrificed"

Mordin curing genophage - sacrifice

Shepard "choosing a color" - being sacrificed

[Ultrabobo]

txgoldrush wrote...

Wow....actually it makes sense..."When Will the Circle Be Unbroken" was Bioshock Infinite's song.

ME3's ending, the extended cut, is hated because the fanbase wants to be ignorant. To ignore the narrative that leads up to the ending, or the "not so feel good" themes such as sacrifice, finality, and loss or interpet the ending in a way that is never supposed to be interpeted as such.

The original cut failed because it failed to thematically connect the ending to the rest of the narrative....the extended cut however, does.

ME3's main theme was "victory throguh sacrifice" and sacrifice was needed to activate the Crucible...plain and simple.

I think that's not the point. At least for me wasn't.
I fully agree with the victory through sacrifice part, honestly i was expecting Shepard to die, my issue was with how it happened. It just didn't make sense for me. The warden could die in DA:O, but made sense in the context of the game, made sense with the setting, the story (and yes, was possible to avoid it, what's wrong with a happy ending?).
Is not about being ignorant, is about making sense of what happened. I've spent three games uniting the galaxy, and at the end the only difference is collateral damage. The more ships, the less damage from the explosions.
I would have been really fine with Shepard blowing up with the Citadel, pushing a button after Anderson dies. Simple as that, no speculation or whatever, just plain old sacrifice, heroics, jargon, chest pounding, simple as that.
I simply don't see the reason to make things so complex and "deep" for the sake of it.

[Iakus]

txgoldrush wrote...
There is no "new conflict" introduced in the last five minutes....you simply were not paying attention...the conflict between organcis and synthetics, an dbigger in scope, created vs creators existed all series long.

Hell, play "Signal Tracking" from ME1 again and then tell me there is no conflict between organics and synthetics.....

Rachni Wars
Krogan Rebellion
Genophage
Skyllian Blitz
Terra Nova
The Thorian
Peak 15
The legions of mercs in ME2
Alien prejudice against humans
Human prejudice against aliens
Yeah, it's all about the synthetics

[Iakus]

Applepie_Svk wrote...

And again ... there is difference betwen "self-sacrifice" and "being sacrificed"

Mordin curing genophage - sacrifice

Shepard "choosing a color" - being sacrificed

Indeed.

Forced sacrifice isn't

[Applepie_Svk]

iakus wrote...

txgoldrush wrote...
There is no "new conflict" introduced in the last five minutes....you simply were not paying attention...the conflict between organcis and synthetics, an dbigger in scope, created vs creators existed all series long.

Hell, play "Signal Tracking" from ME1 again and then tell me there is no conflict between organics and synthetics.....

Rachni Wars
Krogan Rebellion
Genophage
Skyllian Blitz
Terra Nova
The Thorian
Peak 15
The legions of mercs in ME2
Alien prejudice against humans
Human prejudice against aliens
Yeah, it's all about the synthetics

Accusing someone from being ignorant, end like an ignorant... lol

iakus wrote...

Applepie_Svk wrote...

And again ... there is difference betwen "self-sacrifice" and "being sacrificed"

Mordin curing genophage - sacrifice

Shepard "choosing a color" - being sacrificed

Indeed.

Forced sacrifice isn't

Jesus being sacrificed...

Modifié par Applepie_Svk, 23 mars 2013 - 12:38 .

[crimzontearz]

MegaSovereign wrote...

crimzontearz wrote...

MegaSovereign wrote...

Alcatraz got really screwed over in the Crysis trilogy.

well him and Lawrence and SECOND are now prophet so.....

oh and Alcatraz is still alive

I played Crysis 2 and watched Crysis 3's ending.

I also heard Alcatraz isn't mentioned much in the 3rd game.

By the end of the 2nd game, his body got hijacked by the suit and Lawrence.

the book explains they merged


and Nomad is alive too


the protagonist tho was Prophet since C1 tho....there is a trope about it too

[txgoldrush]

iakus wrote...

txgoldrush wrote...
There is no "new conflict" introduced in the last five minutes....you simply were not paying attention...the conflict between organcis and synthetics, an dbigger in scope, created vs creators existed all series long.

Hell, play "Signal Tracking" from ME1 again and then tell me there is no conflict between organics and synthetics.....

Rachni Wars
Krogan Rebellion
Genophage
Skyllian Blitz
Terra Nova
The Thorian
Peak 15
The legions of mercs in ME2
Alien prejudice against humans
Human prejudice against aliens
Yeah, it's all about the synthetics

Did you miss the part where I said "and bigger in scope, created vs creators".....looks like you ignored my post just like you ignored the narrative.

The most MAJOR conflicts depicted in the series is one of the created vs the creators.

Modifié par txgoldrush, 23 mars 2013 - 12:50 .