255 réponses à ce sujet

[KingZayd]

dreamgazer wrote...

The Night Mammoth wrote...

Which Vigil has little to do with. It didn't make the Conduti, or activate it, or place it there, and it doesn't control it. All it does is tell Shepard about it, and that's irrelevant since Shepard would have found it without Vigil's help.

Would Shepard and crew just hop into that thing without any explanation on what it does, where it goes, or how stable it is?

If Saren did? Yes.

[Reorte]

Robosexual wrote...

Reorte wrote...

Vigil only solves a problem that he brought up. Controlling the Citadel was never a problem that the story presented. If Vigil hadn't existed and you just carried on driving through the Ilos archives until you got to the Conduit, had a few comments about "Wow, it's a functioning mass relay!" and drove through it, there wouldn't be an issue. If you then followed the trail of destruction to wind up in the Council chamber, killed Saren, and pressed a few buttons to re-open the arms it really wouldn't have made any difference, we'd just assume it was another piece of technology that Shepard knew how to use that the player doesn't (in the same way as I've not the faintest idea how to operate an omnitool but aren't bothered by Shepard doing so).

Vigil's datafile exists mainly as an excuse to have to visit him to hear his exposition rather than to solve an unsolvable problem.

Vigil brings up the situation, but he doesn't create it. The problem was there and Vigil appeared from no where and solved it.

The possibility of it being written another way doesn't change that.

To a point, yes, but in terms of how much impact it has on the structure of the story it makes it much less of an issue and a much lesser DEM, if at all. It's less of one than Tali.

Modifié par Reorte, 17 mai 2013 - 05:09 .

[CronoDragoon]

You guys are missing the biggest contrivance in ME1; that dude sleeping behind boxes identifying Saren. If not for that then Saren gets away with everything and we don't have Mass Effect 1 at all.

[The Night Mammoth]

CronoDragoon wrote...

You guys are missing the biggest contrivance in ME1; that dude sleeping behind boxes identifying Saren. If not for that then Saren gets away with everything and we don't have Mass Effect 1 at all.

That was the Catalyst.

[TheProtheans]

Robosexual wrote...

TheProtheans wrote...

Robosexual wrote...

Don't forget the info dump Deus Ex Machina, Vigil.

Vendetta is his cousin.

Vendetta wouldn't clasify as a Deus Ex Machina. A plot device yeah, but there are many missions based around him and he doesn't solve anything, unlike Vigil.

I actually didn't read the DEM part or pay attention.
I'm talking about the info dump, twice they gave us info dump with the VI.
And neither are a DEM as someone already told you.

[Clayless]

Reorte wrote...

Robosexual wrote...

Vigil brings up the situation, but he doesn't create it. The problem was there and Vigil appeared from no where and solved it.

The possibility of it being written another way doesn't change that.

To a point, yes, but in terms of how much impact it has on the structure of the story it makes it much less of an issue and a much lesser DEM, if at all. It's less of one than Tali.

Technically he has a big impact, especially in the narrative.

The whole point of this is that people tend to look on the previous installments through rose-tinted glasses. Some people hate the Catalyst for example, some try to say it's a DEM, but it's not. Some people love Vigil, some try to say it isn't a DEM, but it is.

In the end none of this should matter really. As you can see, the narrative function of something doesn't make it intrinsically good or bad.

[KaiserShep]

I agree with Robosexual. Vigil is a believable component of the story, even if it is kind of out of nowhere, because its reasons for existence make complete sense, considering where you are at this point. Aside from that, it doesn't provide you with the actual method of resolving the threat; it just points you in the right direction.

[SpamBot2000]

Robosexual wrote...

The whole point of this is that people tend to look on the previous installments through rose-tinted glasses. 

No, the whole point of this is that some people are trying to defend the crap in ME3 by pointing to things in ME1 and maligning them as somehow equally crappy. Which is untrue.

[TheProtheans]

Ok so the problem was getting the Crucible to work/function correctly, does the Catalyst solve this problem by raising Shepard up and giving him the ability to use the Crucible?

[CronoDragoon]

The Night Mammoth wrote...

CronoDragoon wrote...

You guys are missing the biggest contrivance in ME1; that dude sleeping behind boxes identifying Saren. If not for that then Saren gets away with everything and we don't have Mass Effect 1 at all.

That was the Catalyst.

Epic foreshadowing!

[SpamBot2000]

KaiserShep wrote...

I agree with Robosexual. Vigil is a believable component of the story, even if it is kind of out of nowhere, because its reasons for existence make complete sense, considering where you are at this point. Aside from that, it doesn't provide you with the actual method of resolving the threat; it just points you in the right direction.

That's not what he's saying, though. He's the one calling Vigil a Deus ex Machina.

[TheProtheans]

SpamBot2000 wrote...

Robosexual wrote...

The whole point of this is that people tend to look on the previous installments through rose-tinted glasses. 

No, the whole point of this is that some people are trying to defend the crap in ME3 by pointing to things in ME1 and maligning them as somehow equally crappy. Which is untrue.

dreamgazer is a god awful poster like that.
It's like everyday he trying more and more to be worse.

[CronoDragoon]

SpamBot2000 wrote...

No, the whole point of this is that some people are trying to defend the crap in ME3 by pointing to things in ME1 and maligning them as somehow equally crappy. Which is untrue.

How crappy it is really depends on the person. Mass Effect 1 has its fair share of contrivances, only because the ending was happy no one really cared enough to dissect them.

[KaiserShep]

SpamBot2000 wrote...

KaiserShep wrote...

I agree with Robosexual. Vigil is a believable component of the story, even if it is kind of out of nowhere, because its reasons for existence make complete sense, considering where you are at this point. Aside from that, it doesn't provide you with the actual method of resolving the threat; it just points you in the right direction.

That's not what he's saying, though. He's the one calling Vigil a Deus ex Machina.

I know, but I agree that it doesn't matter. I should have clarified. 

CronoDragoon wrote...

SpamBot2000 wrote...

No, the whole point of this is that some people are trying to defend the crap in ME3 by pointing to things in ME1 and maligning them as somehow equally crappy. Which is untrue.

How crappy it is really depends on the person. Mass Effect 1 has its fair share of contrivances, only because the ending was happy no one really cared enough to dissect them.

I wonder if it had a lot to do with some of the reveals in the story too. Mass Effect started off seeming kind of goofy in places, but then it suddenly turned satisfyingly dark and foreboding. Of course, this isn't until you get to Vermire, but every time I replay and think that this is such a chore, I feel as if it was all worth it to get back to that point. Aside from that, it probably remains one of the most solid bits of narrative in the entire series. Everything from retaking the Normandy after lockdown, to getting to Ilos and running to the conduit is one of the most unbeatable sequences in the entire series. 

Modifié par KaiserShep, 17 mai 2013 - 06:02 .

[SpamBot2000]

I don't find dreamgazer a particularly unreasonable poster myself. It's not like he's blindly flinging dirt at the previous games in defending the genius of ME3, like some folks do. And you can have a decent conversation with him. Or at least I think I can.

Modifié par SpamBot2000, 17 mai 2013 - 06:02 .

[SpamBot2000]

CronoDragoon wrote...

SpamBot2000 wrote...

No, the whole point of this is that some people are trying to defend the crap in ME3 by pointing to things in ME1 and maligning them as somehow equally crappy. Which is untrue.

How crappy it is really depends on the person. Mass Effect 1 has its fair share of contrivances, only because the ending was happy made sense no one really cared enough to dissect them.

Fixed, at no extra charge.

[Clayless]

SpamBot2000 wrote...

Robosexual wrote...

The whole point of this is that people tend to look on the previous installments through rose-tinted glasses. 

No, the whole point of this is that some people are trying to defend the crap in ME3 by pointing to things in ME1 and maligning them as somehow equally crappy. Which is untrue.

What is your point in this situation?

Is it that you think I'm defending ME3 by pointing out that Vigil in ME1 is a DEM? How would that defend ME3? You can't say that that I'm saying they're somehow "equally crappy", as that would be a direct contradiction to the very post you quoted.

Or is it that you think if someone was defending ME3, pointing that out would therefore be all you need to do to protect ME1 from criticism? Rather than an actual defense?

[dreamgazer]

TheProtheans wrote...

dreamgazer is a god awful poster like that.
It's like everyday he trying more and more to be worse.

Excuse me?

[CronoDragoon]

TheProtheans wrote...

dreamgazer is a god awful poster like that.
It's like everyday he trying more and more to be worse.

Yeah, no. Maybe the fact that he doesn't automatically take a side depending on his view of the ending confuses you?

[KaiserShep]

dreamgazer wrote...

TheProtheans wrote...

dreamgazer is a god awful poster like that.
It's like everyday he trying more and more to be worse.

Excuse me?

Smells like love to me, man. 

[SpamBot2000]

Robosexual wrote...

What is your point in this situation?

Is it that you think I'm defending ME3 by pointing out that Vigil in ME1 is a DEM? How would that defend ME3? You can't say that that I'm saying they're somehow "equally crappy", as that would be a direct contradiction to the very post you quoted.

Or is it that you think if someone was defending ME3, pointing that out would therefore be all you need to do to protect ME1 from criticism? Rather than an actual defense?

Yes, I think that's what you are doing. I don't know why you think that's such a good defense, but you keep doing it nonetheless. Maybe you are just arguing for low standards in general.

And I'm not really "protecting" ME1 from criticism. You can mail your opinion on it to everyone concerned for all I care. Just stop trying to throw it in front of the criticism ME3 so richly deserves on the ME3 forum.

[CronoDragoon]

SpamBot2000 wrote...

Fixed, at no extra charge.

It made more sense, no doubt about that.

[dreamgazer]

KaiserShep wrote...

dreamgazer wrote...

TheProtheans wrote...

dreamgazer is a god awful poster like that.
It's like everyday he trying more and more to be worse.

Excuse me?

Smells like love to me, man. 

Smells like something, that's for sure. 

[AresKeith]

dreamgazer wrote...

TheProtheans wrote...

dreamgazer is a god awful poster like that.
It's like everyday he trying more and more to be worse.

Excuse me?

Yea, that comment is odd

[Seboist]

CronoDragoon wrote...

You guys are missing the biggest contrivance in ME1; that dude sleeping behind boxes identifying Saren. If not for that then Saren gets away with everything and we don't have Mass Effect 1 at all.

Lol, desperately trying to slander ME1 to prop that POS ME3 I see. Yeah, big "contrivance" that there was a survivor that spotted him after coming across a bunch of others.