779 réponses à ce sujet

[Ryzaki]

AlanC9 wrote...

Wait... Ryzaki, you're asking me to tell you what's wrong with Synthesis? Surely you've seen all the standard objections by now.

No I'm asking you to tell me how picking Synthesis isn't RPing an idiot compared to Destroy or control.

Especially when the actions to even pick all those options is pretty facepalm worthy in itself. (walking towards an exploding tube, letting yourself be electrocuted to death, jumping into a giant beam of green light)

Modifié par Ryzaki, 02 avril 2013 - 09:14 .

[AlanC9]

Ryzaki wrote...

AlanC9 wrote...

Anyway, my point was that there's no irony here. Gaider's character
picks the best option available, as he sees it, because Gaider isn't
role-playing an idiot. On later playthroughs, of course, you may want to
RP an idiot, or at least someone who has different beliefs about what
the best choice would be; otherwise, your characters would always make
the same choice.

Also...how is Synthesis a less idiotic choice than control or destroy? 

Is the italed sentence somehow unclear?

The character thinks Synthesis is the best choice. The character therefore picks Synthesis because the character isn't an idiot and wants to pick the choice he likes best. Whether the player thinks that Synthesis should have been in the game in the first place is irrelevant.

[Ryzaki]

AlanC9 wrote...

Ryzaki wrote...

AlanC9 wrote...

Anyway, my point was that there's no irony here. Gaider's character
picks the best option available, as he sees it, because Gaider isn't
role-playing an idiot. On later playthroughs, of course, you may want to
RP an idiot, or at least someone who has different beliefs about what
the best choice would be; otherwise, your characters would always make
the same choice.

Also...how is Synthesis a less idiotic choice than control or destroy? 

Is the italed sentence somehow unclear?

The character thinks Synthesis is the best choice. The character therefore picks Synthesis because the character isn't an idiot and wants to pick the choice he likes best. Whether the player thinks that Synthesis should have been in the game in the first place is irrelevant.

Yeah you saying Gaider isn't playing an idiot is what confused me. If you had said "because Shep isn't an idiot" I'd gotten the RP angle.

Though my Shep lols at any Shep picking Synthesis and thinking he/she isn't an idiot.

Modifié par Ryzaki, 02 avril 2013 - 09:17 .

[AlanC9]

Thing is, some Sheps are idiots. Some Refuse Sheps, for instance.

Modifié par AlanC9, 02 avril 2013 - 09:20 .

[Ryzaki]

AlanC9 wrote...

Thing is, some Sheps are idiots. Some Refuse Sheps, for instance.

Eh I'd pick refuse before I pick Synthesis (or bad destroy). [Synthesis simply because the whole ending pisses me off bad destroy because you pretty much nuke everything]

Actually refuse is a perfectly viable choice rather than bad destroy. At least in the former you're not destroying almost all life. Yes you and the people you love are dead...but they'd die in bad destroy as well. Along with millions of others. In refuse there's still the chance that someone can hide away like Javik and await future races to wake them up. Not ideal but better than blowing almost everything to kingdom come.

So it depends on circumstances.

And of course there's the metagame "screw all these options I don't care. Kill everything don't even matter." 

So yeah while refuse is an idiot choice sometimes (most of the time to be fair). I'd so pick it more often if the next cycle didn't run to the crucible and use it anyway picking between starbrats RGB endings.

Also he at least didn't jump into glowing beam of light (even if he did stand there like a chump and not even try to tell anyone starbrat was on the Citadel. GG shepard).

Modifié par Ryzaki, 02 avril 2013 - 09:28 .

[CaptainCommander]

Sorry a dude who works for the company that gave us ME3 decided to pick casey hudson green? Next you're gonna tell me politicians of a ruling party agree with their policies and leaders. MADNESS I SAY! Utter madness!!

[Bfler]

Now you guys know, that in DA:I the Architect will be canon alive and it will be one of the most important tasks of the PC to ensure, that he is able to fulfill his plan.

[Peranor]

Can't we just agree that all endings are idiotic in their own way?
As Ryzaki said. Even the actions to even pick all those options is pretty facepalm worthy in itself. And that is just the start of it.

[Argolas]

Eterna5 wrote...

Reapers are not Synthesized life, if they were then they wouldn't have been affectedf by Synthesis nor would the catalyst have been unaware of how to sucessfully implement it. Even in Synthesis the Reapers are changed. 

Also the Reapers being "Perfect" has nothing to do with the perfection I'm talking about. 

So what is the difference between Reapers and Synthesized life?

"Your organic energy, the essence of who and what you are, will be broken down and then dispersed."

Replace "dispersed" with "pumped into the Reaper" and you have exactly what harvesting does.

And how are the Reapers affected by Synthesis? For all we know, the Catalyst could just have ordered them to stop killing.

[Ryzaki]

Bfler wrote...

Now you guys know, that in DA:I the Architect will be canon alive and it will be one of the most important tasks of the PC to ensure, that he is able to fulfill his plan.

...as much as  I love DA this would be enough for me never to play the series again.

No just...no in so many ways.

[Peranor]

Ryzaki wrote...

Bfler wrote...

Now you guys know, that in DA:I the Architect will be canon alive and it will be one of the most important tasks of the PC to ensure, that he is able to fulfill his plan.

...as much as  I love DA this would be enough for me never to play the series again.

No just...no in so many ways.

But completely plausible

[arathor_87]

Ofc, why wouldn't he like the the ME3 endings? He's an artist who creates art. Look at his masterpiece  Dragon Age 2. *Sarcasm*

He know how to destroy a franchise and create plot holes. For example, even if I chopped Lelianas head off in Dragon Age: Origins she will be alive in Dragon Age 2. So why should I listen to him? Ofc he defends the ME3 endings, it's poor writing, something he's familiar with. 

DA:O is amazing.
DA2 is bad.

ME is amazing.
ME2 is amazing
ME3 is a masterpience until the last mission and the ending(s).

SWTOR is a gigantic failure.

I'm starting to see a pattern, and it's not a good one. Bioware needs to step up.

Modifié par arathor_87, 02 avril 2013 - 10:12 .

[MaximizedAction]

I really hope he's just roleplaying...

[lex0r11]

http://i158.photobuc...e2.jpg:original

[Deathsaurer]

Applepie_Svk wrote...

If synthesis is inevitable then what´s the point in choosing it ?

Because a pushy AI wants its solution now! Not after centuries of conflict and struggle and potentially its death, haven't all the eons it's been at this been a long enough wait? But really who cares about that thing. It'd kill you if it thought there was something to be gained from doing so. I do wonder what exactly it'd do once its purpose has been fulfilled though...

[SilentK]

Just a little note on David Gaider and the twilight-stuff a couple of people are saying. Remember now that he writes our characters, they sometimes have romances. If you are stating something then provide links to it. I get the impression that he finds it interesting to see what makes people tick.

David Gaider wrote...

Maria Caliban wrote...
You have a talent for writing romances that tear the reader's/player's heart out. It would be wrong for such abilities to go to waste and I encourage whatever sadistic elements you might think of in love interests you write. Morrigan leaving no matter what the PC said or did was perfect.

Well, I think Twilight is far more effective with its romantic elements than most people give it credit for. Granted, it has little else going for it-- but the romance it does well. I find it a fascinating exercise to analyze exactly why that is (which I do for many romances... thankfully Cori is a giant romance movie buff).

Just, you know, don't write any of the F/F romances.

I think I could swing it, if I needed to. You like another chick because she's more like a man, right? She can fix your car and stuff? I get it, I get it. [smilie]http://social.bioware.com/images/forum/emoticons/devil.png[/smilie]

David Gaider wrote...

MarginalBeast wrote...
Really? Many people feel that the romance in Twilight is incredibly unrealistic and/or creepy and/or unhealthy, and I tend to agree with them.

I doubt there's a romance that's ever going to be universally appealing--and while I don't find the romance in Twilight personally appealing it'd be silly to dismiss outright the fact that it has great appeal to some, and perhaps a little elitist to dismiss those who find it appealing as simple-minded. In the context of the books, Bella is designed as a character meant to be projected onto... but if one isn't willing/able to project themselves onto her they're never really going to get it.

The same could be said for, say, Alistair. For those who don't like him they'll never get those who do, and they can pretty easily deconstruct both his character and his romance if they want to.

Either way, I think the romance itself has some interesting elements in its construction and offers something to learn-- for those who are willing to try. And I've tried, God help me. This is what I do for you people. [smilie]http://social.bioware.com/images/forum/emoticons/wink.png[/smilie]

Linky to quotes

Modifié par SilentK, 02 avril 2013 - 11:23 .

[dorktainian]

Has anyone ever thought that the endings to mass effect 3 could be the equivelant of star treks 'kobyashi maru' test - so as to not find out the correct solution, but how you react when you find out there is no solution enabling us to win? A no-win scenario designed to test potential N7's / Spectres / insert class here?

[HolyAvenger]

People love taking DG out of context and bashing him. Its pretty pathetic on BSN.

[drayfish]

AlanC9 wrote...

Thing is, some Sheps are idiots. Some Refuse Sheps, for instance.

Right...  Unquestioningly taking the word of the serial genocidal maniac who is intent on wiping you and everything you represent out of the galaxy, and who repeatedly uses deception as its primary weapon, when he asks you to (pretty please) suicide yourself and inflict a nightmare on your own people?

...Yeah, the 'Refuse' Shepards are idiots.

While it's fun to smirk and act self-righteous (and man, you really do love banging that 'Refuse is lame' drum), its worth remembering that all of the endings (including Refuse) are garbled, poisoned chalise nonsense.

So unless you are metagaming yourself into the foreknowledge that only the Catalyst's devil deals will save you (or you just really do think genocide, mind control or eugenics sound fun), throwing your own people under a bus and hurling yourself to death because your enemy doesn't think your species can play nice is patently ridiculous.

[Steelcan]

I don't really care who picked what. I've decided that the Catalyst is full of it and plan to move forward from there.

[NeonFlux117]

didn't his dude write Dragon Age 2, or at the very lest chipped in? I think he did so.......... Yeah. so.......... Who cares? I guess. And plus, Bioware luvs them some green magik space beam and he's employed by Bioware right? So maybe he's just SAYING what the company want's him to say, cause they know minions and sheep will take it to heart and get all worked up about it. Really. Who care's about Bioware and/or their employees ending selections of a game and series that's dead. Move on.

[Vortex13]

iakus wrote...

CosmicGnosis wrote...

Well, I'm a huge fan of the Dragon Age series, and it was interesting to discover that the lead writer chose an ending that is reviled by many. I was motivated to discuss the "grayness" of the endings.

As long as he doesn't decide to optimal solution to solve the mage-templar conflict is to forcibly turn everyone on Thedas into abominations, does his preference really matter?

It is interesting, especially since the DA equivilant of synthesis was already proposed in DA:The Calling, and rejected by the protagonists as deplorable and evil.

The way things were handled in Awakening I could accept since it an INDIVIUAL basis, and not turning everyone everywhere against their wishes.

[cyrslash1974]

I don't know who is this David and he can do what he wants.

He prefers synthesis, I prefer Destroy, other players prefer control....

I don't see the problem.