236 réponses à ce sujet

[David7204]

The Night Mammoth wrote...

I always thought it'd be interesting to see what happens if Shepard were a little more pro-active. I'm not entirely certain what could be done to vary the outcomes depending on past choices, but the Shepard I played made significant headway with the geth and the krogan, and had the support of the rachni.

It would have been interesting to see a situation where, thanks to Shepard actually doing some preparation for the Reapers instead of sitting on Earth for months on end doing nothing, the underdogs of the galaxy are the ones coming to the rescue of the Council.

If a price must be paid to defeat the Reapers if you haven't prepared enough, then Shepard and the Citadel would be obvious candidates. Staging the final battle there is important, in my mind.

Out of the question.

To copy and paste from another thread of mine...

The only way people would be satisfied that the galaxy made adequate preparations would be if the Reapers were dealt with easily. And that's unacceptable. Off the table. Why? Because it would be a crap story. Because it would be a complete cop-out after all the build-up of the Reapers from the previous games. Because it would make all the other cycles look stupid to have lost when the current one has such an easy time.

You might be thinking "Why not have both? Why not have the galaxy build up significantly, and then have the Reapers roll in and wreck things anyway? It would make the story more dramatic and desperate and demonstrate how powerful the Reapers are?" That would be even worse, because it would render every theme of unity, friendship, and heroism completely meaningless. Curing the genophage was a total waste of time because the krogan all got killed by the Reapers anyway. Uniting the geth and quarians counted for nothing because the Reapers just cut through both their fleets anyway. Not only that, we're now at least halfway through the game and no closer to actually solving the central conflict. In fact, we're a great deal worse off than before now that the galaxy is crippled. So that's not an option. And that doesn't even consider how plausible those preparations would actually be.

Modifié par David7204, 28 avril 2013 - 10:51 .

[Morlath]

Megaton_Hope wrote...

Uh huh.

Here's the thing about data. Data can come to you! Even if the original form in which it was stored degrades or becomes corrupted, endless copies of important information can be made. In the present day, storage capacity and durability continue to advance at a rapid pace. There is every reason to believe that in a future as flush with materials science as Mass Effect, that should still be the case. There should not be enough capacity in that archive to overtax the Council's ability to make duplicates, which they have every reason to do. If they can read it at all, they can copy it.

As such, the entire contents of the archive should be available 1. somewhere the Citadel, 2. at the University of Serrice, and 3. in most any major center of study, since study of the Protheans is so widespread and important. Dr. Core's sabotage should be almost meaningless, and Liara should not have to physically interact with the archive on Mars.

Let us be clear. You are talking about three individual plot arcs in a single story as if they were three separate stories. The three games, however, constitute a narratively linked adventure of a single character and his companions to defeat a single threat.  The threat that the Reapers pose was never resolved in the first game, or the second, in which it receded into the background for a while. The protagonist's goal remained static throughout, however; stop the Reapers. The things he did during those earlier plot arcs are incidental.

It all depends on how much the Council allows for Prothean data to be available to the public but, regardless, I've already agreed that the Mars lead-in to the Crucible was a weak plot point because they didn't make it a major detail in previous games how much/little data there is there. Even a throw away line by Liari in ME2 about how old Prothean sites are being re-excivated would have allowed for Mars to have the data.

And no, I'm talking about them being three distinct story archetypes. They are all part of the overal telling of the Reaper tale but each one has its own distinctive style and plot reasoning and these are important to understanding the specifics of each one. In ME1 you're chasing Saren and any information about the Reapers must therefore come from plot points related to your search for Saren. We don't find Ilos and speak to Vigil because Shepard is on a Quest for information but because that's where the chase for Saren leads. Same with ME2. The story arc is about fighting the Collectors and the information about the Reapers (an organic-inorganic hybred species, genetic mutations of the Protheans) comes about through this specific story telling.

In ME3 there is no one specific enemy to fight nor is it possible for Shepard to take on the Reapers without an additonal weapon. ME3's entire concept therefore is the building of a weapon and the search for its key aspect. The Mars data is the invite to the haunted mansion, the map of treasure located on an island, and the giving of this initial piece of data is (as we agreed) the weak part.

We are told from the very beginning that the missing piece is the Catalyst. That it is the key to making the machine work and regardless of how this data is given to us, it makes any claims for the Catalyst being a Deux ex Machina to be void.

[Village_Idiot]

David7204 wrote...

The galaxy is a big, big place. Lots of people, lots of resources, lots of weapons. War takes a long time.

True enough, the harvest takes a long time.We've know as much since ME1, Vigil and Javik both discuss how the Prothean empire took centuries to completely cease to be, and this was with the Reapers' "Plan A" of a surprise Citadel attack no less.

The thing is though, the Reapers seems to be strategically incompetent. For much of ME3 the bulk of their forces seem to sit on Earth harvesting and doing little else. From a strategic point of view this makes absolutely no sense- the Alliance fleet at this point has beat a full retreat, leaving little more than a gigantic, disarmed civilian population. What would make more sense to do now is to eliminate all races' capability to wage war- that is, to destroy their fleets, shipyards, command centres and so forth. Earth, whilst home to the vast majority of humans in the galaxy, is strategically worth little with its fleets elsewhere.

We do see the Reapers' eventually making progress across other theatres- Palaven and Thessia for example (though Palaven never "falls" by the game's conclusion). My point however, is that if the Reapers were not pointlessly squandering their resources by sitting around on Earth and started going for strategically valuable targets instead, the fight elsewhere in the galaxy would have gone to hell in a handbasket pretty abruptly. Had the Reapers focussed on the aforementioned high-value objectives rather than harvesting populations, the races would rapidly lose their ability to fight.

Admittedly, the Reapers' "grand plan" as it were could possibly be attributed to their arrogance/superiority- they sit around harvesting because they know (or at least believe) the races of the galaxy have no hope of victory anyway. Given the Reapers' resources are not infinite however, wouldn't it serve their interests to eliminate the galaxy's power bases and reduce their own casualties as a result?

Modifié par Shadrach 88, 28 avril 2013 - 11:09 .

[The Night Mammoth]

Sometimes, I think you've got a much too constrictingly specific idea for how Mass Effect should have occurred, and it acts like blinders so you project and assume too much off of what people are saying.

[David7204]

Shadrach 88 wrote...

David7204 wrote...

The galaxy is a big, big place. Lots of people, lots of resources, lots of weapons. War takes a long time.

True enough, the harvest takes a long time.We've know as much since ME1, Vigil and Javik both discuss how the Prothean empire took centuries to completely cease to be, and this was with the Reapers' "Plan A" of a surprise Citadel attack no less.

The thing is though, the Reapers seems to be strategically incompetent. For much of ME3 the bulk of their forces seem to sit on Earth harvesting and doing little else. From a strategic point of view this makes absolutely no sense- the Alliance fleet at this point has beat a full retreat, leaving little more than a gigantic, disarmed civilian population. What would make more sense to do now is to eliminate all races' capability to wage war- that is, to destroy their fleets, shipyards, command centres and so forth. Earth, whilst home to the vast majority of humans in the galaxy, is strategically worth little with its fleets elsewhere.

We do see the Reapers' eventually making progress across other theatres- Palaven and Thessia for example (though Palaven never "falls" by the game's conclusion). My point however, that if the Reapers were not pointlessly squandering their resources by sitting around on Earth and started going for strategically valuable targets, the fight elsewhere in the galaxy would have gone to hell in a handbasket pretty abruptly. Had the Reapers focussed on the aforementioned high-value objectives rather than harvesting populations the races would rapidly lose their ability to fight.

Admittedly, the Reapers' "grand plan" as it were could possibly be attributed to their arrogance/superiority- they sit around harvesting because they know (or at least believe) the races of the galaxy have no hope of victory anyway. Given the Reapers' resources are not infinite however, wouldn't it serve their interests to eliminate the galaxy's power bases and reduce their own casualties as a result?

No, it wouldn't. Frankly, this is a lousy analysis. All you're thinking about is fleets and just forgetting about everything else.

FIrst of all, the vast majority of the population would not be killed by the Reapers themselves. They'd be killed by husks. That's the real weapon. Billions, even trillions, of cheap, expandable, effective troops. That's what kills the populations. Not the Reapers. Their focus on harvesting is very smart.

Secondly, you cripple a military by crippling the infrastructure. How long do you think the fleets will last without losgitstics? There's overwhelming evidence indicating the Reapers are destroying shipyards and fuel depots and such. The Reapers are not 'ignoring' the fleets, they're killing them whenever they have a chance. But devoting their resources to chasing ships around the galaxy while the populations are mobilizing? No way. that's completely silly. You do remember that there's no way to track ships moving through FTL? And 'Command Centers?' This is not an RTS game.

Populations and infrastructure and not worth 'little,' as you claim. They make all the difference in the world.

Modifié par David7204, 28 avril 2013 - 11:17 .

[Lebanese Dude]

I came to the conclusion that the Crucible was the product of the Leviathans who never managed to complete it properly and over time, whenever it was found, it was further refined to include more options.

It can't be a Deus Ex Machina. It was intended all along. The full purpose is only revealed at the end, as any story usually does. We are the meddling kids.

Modifié par Lebdood, 28 avril 2013 - 11:13 .

[In Exile]

CDR David Shepard wrote...

I simply used the word "may"...because I just do not know whether they did or not. I was just taking a neutral stance on that topic...since it wasn't the point of the thread.

My point is simply that the idea of the protheans having blueprints for some ancient weapon of mass destruction has been there since the beginning.

Bioware is totally open about the fact that they make up their games story as they go along.

[In Exile]

David7204 wrote...

The Catalyst is absolutely not a DEM.

How does the introduction of the Catalyst solve anything? It doesn't. The Crucible could have just fired and killed all the Reapers. The Catalyst introduces new problems, not solutions.

No, that's exactly what a DEM is. Including solving a problem no one knew or cared about until it showed up.

[Lebanese Dude]

The entire story arc is about the development of Shepard and his views of the galaxy. In Mass Effect 3, ithe battle between Synthetics and Organics is heavily examined. 

Modifié par Lebdood, 28 avril 2013 - 11:28 .

[Mangalores]

Morlath wrote...

...

On the other hand Hero has no idea that this crossing is required before setting out and finds themself trapped without any sign of being able to cross safely. Suddenly a god appears and gives Hero the special item that allows safe passage. This is a Deus ex Machina.

...

Well, we have an inanimate object (Catalyst) we search for turned into a godlike actor (Starchild). It was never proposed through the story that the Catalyst is a godlike AI. Shepard still thinks it's the Citadel when he meets the Starchild and the Starchild corrects him. The Catalyst also only intervenes after it is made clear the Crucible doesn't work and Shepard falls unconscious aka Shepard can't do anything to finish the job hence making the plot unsolvable without him appearing.

There are many variations of this theme. In imagery it's even a one on one portrayal of a deus ex machina even if it is not classical in every detail in plot structure though that doesn't negate it completely.

[David7204]

The Catalyst is not a DEM. Look, I know good and well the kind of complaints people on the BSN make about the Catalyst. I know good and well exactly the way people feel about him. And I know good and well that people are gleefully willing to make pretty much any accusation, no matter how ridiculous, to try and justify their instinctive hatred of him with some reasoning.

Modifié par David7204, 28 avril 2013 - 11:34 .

[Megaton_Hope]

You can have a deus ex machina without a god-like figure, I hope everybody realizes that. It's not the figure of the god, but their sudden introduction by the action of the machine that's important in the analogy. It's a criticism of lazy writing.

[Morlath]

David7204 wrote...

The Catalyst is not a DEM. Look, I know good and well the kind of complaints people on the BSN make about the Catalyst. I know good and well exactly the way people feel about him. And I know good and well that people are gleefully willing to make pretty much any accusation, no matter how ridiculous, to try and justify their instinctive hatred of him with some reasoning.

This.

Mangalores wrote...

Well, we have an inanimate object
(Catalyst) we search for turned into a godlike actor (Starchild). It was
never proposed through the story that the Catalyst is a godlike AI.
Shepard still thinks it's the Citadel when he meets the Starchild and
the Starchild corrects him. The Catalyst also only intervenes after it
is made clear the Crucible doesn't work and Shepard falls unconscious
aka Shepard can't do anything to finish the job hence making the plot
unsolvable without him appearing.

There are many variations of
this theme. In imagery it's even a one on one portrayal of a deus ex
machina even if it is not classical in every detail in plot structure
though that doesn't negate it completely.

Really think about this.

In the beginning of the game:

1 - We are told that there is a weapon that might work.
2 - We are told that if it does, the only way it CAN work is with something called the Catalyst.
3 - We spend the game looking for clues as to what this Catalyst is.

At the end of the game:

1 - The Crucible docks with the Citadel but nothing happens.
2 - Shepard interacts with the Catalyst to activate the Crucible.
3 - End of the war.

We are told from the very beginning that in order to make it all work we must use the Catalyst with the Crucible and so the "problem" at the end is neither a) a surprise nor anything new. The trouble is that people where expecting Shepard to interact with a console and make it work rather than be taken into a hidden AI core and have to have a conversation with the Catalyst beforehand.

It does not matter that the Catalyst is sentient. It does not matter if the Catalyst appears to be a Reaper god. By the very rules laid out at the beginning of ME3 it cannot be a DEM. There's no surprise problem, there's no surprise introduction (there IS a surprise twist as to what the Catalyst is but that's something else) and we knew from the beginning that we needed to use A with B in order to make C.

Modifié par Morlath, 28 avril 2013 - 11:47 .

[AlanC9]

Shadrach 88 wrote...
Admittedly, the Reapers' "grand plan" as it were could possibly be attributed to their arrogance/superiority- they sit around harvesting because they know (or at least believe) the races of the galaxy have no hope of victory anyway. Given the Reapers' resources are not infinite however, wouldn't it serve their interests to eliminate the galaxy's power bases and reduce their own casualties as a result?

It's not clear to me that the forces opposing the Reapers will get any significant reinforcements before the Reapers have taken over the whole galaxy. All of ME3 seems to take place over about six months or so. That doesn't seem to be enough time to build an ME dreadnaught.

And it looks like the Reapers actually did hit all the homeworlds except Sur'Kesh , which seem to be the major population and industrial centers even for the species that have been in space for centuries.

Modifié par AlanC9, 28 avril 2013 - 11:48 .

[In Exile]

AlanC9 wrote...

A lot of the ideas I've heard are pretty much the same thing happening. Shepard fighting to reach a win button, variously defined. Central Reaper computer override, etc. and so forth. I'm not sure I've ever heard a non-superweapon plan that I thought was much better than the Crucible.

Because of how ME is set up, Shepard has to reach a win-button, though I would have had it be the collective unconscious of the reapers - basically, having each reaper be a simulated paradise of each civilizations great achievements, and force Shepard to decide whether what might well be enternal and immortal bliss inside a reaper shell as a digitized species is worth it vs. the 'real' world outside. 

Of course, that's the kind of thing you have to set up since ME2.

[AlanC9]

In Exile wrote...

David7204 wrote...

The Catalyst is absolutely not a DEM.

How does the introduction of the Catalyst solve anything? It doesn't. The Crucible could have just fired and killed all the Reapers. The Catalyst introduces new problems, not solutions.

No, that's exactly what a DEM is. Including solving a problem no one knew or cared about until it showed up.

I know you don't mean it this way, but I don't see how anything that solves a problem couldn't be called a DEM by that standard.

[In Exile]

AlanC9 wrote...
I know you don't mean it this way, but I don't see how anything that solves a problem couldn't be called a DEM by that standard.

The distiction is the overall structure of the introduction. All stories are about introducing problems and solving them. Narrative techniques are just meta-comments on how writers do that.

If, at what should be the climax of your plot, you introduce a new character, a new problem that is metaphysically unsolvable, and then immediately turn around and solve that problem with the new character you've introduced and present this as the solution to the plot, then you've create something that's quite close to a DEM.

[David7204]

The Catalyst is not 'new' in any meaningful sense. He's a voice of the Reapers, and the Reapers have been present in the story since the beginning.

Modifié par David7204, 28 avril 2013 - 11:59 .

[Megaton_Hope]

Morlath wrote...
We are told from the very beginning that in order to make it all work we must use the Catalyst with the Crucible and so the "problem" at the end is neither a) a surprise nor anything new. The trouble is that people where expecting Shepard to interact with a console and make it work rather than be taken into a hidden AI core and have to have a conversation with the Catalyst beforehand.

The beginning of the story was on Eden Prime, when Shepard first discovers the Reapers.

God-like powers and sentience are irrelevant to the use of the term deus ex machina.

[Morlath]

Megaton_Hope wrote...

Morlath wrote...
We are told from the very beginning that in order to make it all work we must use the Catalyst with the Crucible and so the "problem" at the end is neither a) a surprise nor anything new. The trouble is that people where expecting Shepard to interact with a console and make it work rather than be taken into a hidden AI core and have to have a conversation with the Catalyst beforehand.

The beginning of the story was on Eden Prime, when Shepard first discovers the Reapers.

God-like powers and sentience are irrelevant to the use of the term deus ex machina.

You knew I meant at the beginning of ME3 and not the beginning of the trilogy.

And I've continued to say that what the Catalyst IS and what it DOES are two completely different things and people are mixing the two in order to fit the DEM argument. I've not called it Starchild after all.

[Foxhound2121]

Don't really care about Casey Hudson copying the dues ex machina concept that much. What bothers me more is the ending choices themselves also copied straight from dues ex.

I still have faith in the A-team who designed mass effect, but I don't expect any creativity from Casey who just copies endings from other games.

Modifié par Foxhound2121, 29 avril 2013 - 12:06 .

[Village_Idiot]

David7204 wrote...

No, it wouldn't. Frankly, this is a lousy analysis. All you're thinking about is fleets and just forgetting about everything else. 

FIrst of all, the vast majority of the population would not be killed by the Reapers themselves. They'd be killed by husks. That's the real weapon. Billions, even trillions, of cheap, expandable, effective troops. That's what kills the populations. Not the Reapers. Their focus on harvesting is very smart.

Secondly, you cripple a military by crippling the infrastructure. How long do you think the fleets will last without losgitstics? There's overwhelming evidence indicating the Reapers are destroying shipyards and fuel depots and such. The Reapers are not 'ignoring' the fleets, they're killing them whenever they have a chance.

Populations and infrastructure and not worth 'little,' as you claim. They make all the difference in the world.

Earth at this point is cut off from the galaxy. All communications bar QECs are cut, and no fleet traffic is getting though the Charon relay. It might still be economically viable after the intial Reaper onslaught, but if those resources are going nowhere, spending time annihilating them has little value whilst the human fleet is regrouping elsewhere. A blockade of the Sol system relay would make far more sense. Destroy the militarily significant planetary centres and he3 operations, cut off access to the system, and move on. Piecemeal harvesting of civilians is labour intensive, and if they have little ability to contribute to the war effort, is also worthless.

To counter your previous starement, I never claimed that infrastructure is worthless, quite the opposite in fact. What the Reapers need to focus on is destroying infrastructure first, and populations later. The former is far easier to cripple than the latter, and the latter is powerless without the fomer. Civilians can't fight Reapers if they can't build ships.

I know WWII analogies are overused, but this has striking resemblance to the order of battle in the United Kingdom during the summer of 1940. As an air war, the power bases were made quite clear- aircraft, airbases, and the factories that supplied both. Intiallly, these were relentlessly targeted, and as a result the UK, although putting up a valiant defence, was losing its ability to counter German air attacks since its aircraft and trained pilots were being lost faster than they could be replaced, and the airstrips required to service them were being destroyed. However, German air tactics subsequently shifted from primarily attacks on military targets to night raids on cities, intended to terrify the civilian population into submission. The new tactic whilst horrific, had far less impact upon the country's ability to field aircraft. As a result, the RAF was allowed time to recover and rebuild, allowing an effective air defence to be fielded again.

Had the Luftwaffe continued to strike airfields, the more likely outcome was that the RAF would have been decimated, handing Germany air superiority and removing the UK's ability to defend itself (since its land forces at this point were still in the process of being re-armed). But by ignoring infrastructure and planes and pursuing civilian targets instead, air forces were squandered attacking a target that was far more resilient and militarily worthless. The Reapers seem to make the same error.

Modifié par Shadrach 88, 29 avril 2013 - 12:17 .

[In Exile]

David7204 wrote...

The Catalyst is not 'new' in any meaningful sense. He's a voice of the Reapers, and the Reapers have been present in the story since the beginning.

To broaden your horizon, here are several definitions for the word new:

1. [/b]Having been made or come into being only a short time ago; recent: a new law.2.a. Still fresh: a new coat of paint.b. Never used or worn before now: a new car; a new hat.3. Just found, discovered, or learned: new information.4. Not previously experienced or encountered; novel or unfamiliar: ideas new to her.5. Different from the former or the old: the new morality.

Let's say I accept that the only thing we judge this by is the connection with the Reapers. Even if the Reapers are new, the fact that there is some controlling Overmind is not established.

Even if that's the case, then the Catalyst still meets either #4 or  (especially) #5, since it's most certainly an entirely differnet kind of existence than the Reapers, an entity whose powers, abilities and mission we've had no introduction to (and, indeed, ME1's Sovereign direcly contradicts that this sort of thing would even exist). 

The Catalyst is new. The problem of "organic vs. AI" is entirely new. And two of the solutions - becoming the Reaper controlling super AI or but every machine and organic in a blender - are entirely new. The third - blow up the reapers - isn't new... until you get to the arbitrary requirement that the Geth and EDI die, which falls under #5. 

[David7204]

And your suggestion seems to be analogous to the Germans bombing the airfields, then abandoning England entirely on the assumption that everyone left is just going to nod and smile.

That's even assuming such a thing is possible. We're talking about a planet. Lots of places to hide, lots of very resourceful people, lots of technology that makes manufacturing and construction likely a hell of a lot easier and quicker than it is now. It's not all about fleets. Ground assets matter. A lot.

Modifié par David7204, 29 avril 2013 - 12:22 .

[David7204]

It should have been obvious from the very beginning that the Reapers had some sort of motive. In fact, it's been obvious to the point that it would have been incredible jarring had the story failed to address or acknowledge that. And the Reapers are shown to be a united force, acting as one, and thinking as one. Creatures who exist to do nothing but carry out the cycles. The fact that they happen to be 'controlled' instead of being individuals who happen to think and act as one is trivial.

The Catalyst is not the three options. The Catalyst is not the Reaper motive. The Catalyst is not the ending. All of those things could easily exist in an identical state with the Catalyst gone. The Catalyst is a character.

If you'd like to argue, for example, that the Reaper motive is jarring, then yes, that's valid. But the Reaper motive and the Catalyst are not the same thing.

Modifié par David7204, 29 avril 2013 - 12:28 .