79 réponses à ce sujet

[David7204]

Given the Codex's diction of 'Contrary to popular belief, Ardat-Yakshi are not that rare blah blah blah...' it seems to me that the discrepancy was intentional.

Since Samara is our only source of information on Ardat-Yakshi, she's the only 'belief' to we to compare to in the first place.

Modifié par David7204, 14 août 2013 - 01:01 .

[MassivelyEffective0730]

David7204 wrote...

Given the Codex's diction of 'Contrary to popular belief, Ardat-Yakshi are not that rare blah blah blah...' it seems to me that the discrepancy was intentional.

Since Samara is our only source of information on Ardat-Yakshi, she's the only 'belief' to we to compare to in the first place.

It's very easy to make it seem intentional if you word it right. 

It sounds very much like a retcon clarification to me.

[David7204]

I didn't word anything. It was worded that way for us.

[Br3admax]

How is one line being denied by all other sources a retcon? Or is closing the shutters like everyone else says to retconing Zaeed saying open them?

[MassivelyEffective0730]

Br3ad wrote...

How is one line being denied by all other sources a retcon? Or is closing the shutters like everyone else says to retconing Zaeed saying open them?

Denial by all other sources or no, the line came first before any other source. It is a retcon.

[MassivelyEffective0730]

David7204 wrote...

I didn't word anything. It was worded that way for us.

And I didn't say you worded it. BW was able to work around it by acknoweldging the original information and dismissing it as myth. Due to the lack of other information on the topic, they were able to due this quite seamlessly.

I'm not really for or against this particular retcon, but it is a retcon nonetheless.

[AresKeith]

Regarding AY, it may not be a retcon but it was handled very poorly from ME2 to ME3

[AlanC9]

There's no way to prove something's a retcon without access to metagame information, right? We need the original design intent. AFAIK we don't have any for this topic..

[chemiclord]

AlanC9 wrote...

There's no way to prove something's a retcon without access to metagame information, right? We need the original design intent. AFAIK we don't have any for this topic..

I'm leaning towards the "retcon" argument honestly.

It is reasonable to consider Samara an authoritative source on this particular topic.  It DOES seem incongruous that she WOULDN'T know that there are more than three Ardat-Yakshi in existance, especially as she apparently knew of the monastery's existance by ME3, nor did she show any particular surprise that it was fairly populated at one time.

Is it a particularly damaging retcon?  No.  But I do believe it is one.

Modifié par chemiclord, 14 août 2013 - 03:28 .

[Clayless]

The Night Mammoth wrote...

Robosexual wrote...

Collector General's implication of being aware and alive once the connection was broken.

What implies the Collector General is alive and aware? 

Because it looks around a little and possibly reacts in a very minimal way to a wave of light and heat?

Why would that mean it's not just the husk Mordin believes it is? Looking around and reacting to basic things such as light and heat aren't exactly signs of sentience or individuality or high intelligence.

A husk (the clue is in the name) wouldn't do anything once it was released if it was actually a husk. The Collector General shows that it does react and is alive.

Plus it's implied. Synthesis more or less confirms it, and the Awakened Collectors confirm it.

[3DandBeyond]

StreetMagic wrote...

I don't know what's worse. Making player choices amount to nothing, or making even their own choices from previous games amount to nothing (like the retconning of Ardat Yakshi, for a small example). I don't think they have a loremaster or "lore bible" like some teams have. It really does seem like a lot of brainstorming.

They actually claimed to have a very big lore bible in between the making of ME2 and 3.  But they've said a lot of things, many of them not so factual.

Modifié par 3DandBeyond, 14 août 2013 - 03:42 .

[3DandBeyond]

AlanC9 wrote...

There's no way to prove something's a retcon without access to metagame information, right? We need the original design intent. AFAIK we don't have any for this topic..

Hmm, ME2 loading screens said your choices in ME2 would have huge consequences in ME3 and yet the most important decision (the last one about a very big thing) really boils down to some almost meaningless numbers here or there and which choice requires the most EMS for the bare minimum.  Story-wise, how the collector base was used in ME3 to set up the human reaper "story" was rather ridiculous.

Now, I can't say specifically that they meant for the base to be more, but I seriously doubt those writing that human reaper heart/brain thing thought that was magnificent and worthy of the choice made in ME2.  I actually kind of struggled as to keeping or destroying it and wondered if I got rid of it just what would be lost.  Foolish me because it was nothing.

[AlanC9]

chemiclord wrote...
I'm leaning towards the "retcon" argument honestly.

It is reasonable to consider Samara an authoritative source on this particular topic.  It DOES seem incongruous that she WOULDN'T know that there are more than three Ardat-Yakshi in existance, especially as she apparently knew of the monastery's existance by ME3, nor did she show any particular surprise that it was fairly populated at one time.

Is it a particularly damaging retcon?  No.  But I do believe it is one.

I get to the same conclusion through a slightly different methodology. If it isn't a retcon, then Bio had always intended both that there would be a bunch of A-Ys around, and that Samara's dialogue would mislead Shepard and the player into thinking that there weren't. I get the first part; A-Ys are kinda cool, and it lets you do a tough Reaper type that can't be mass-produced. I don't get why they'd want to do the second part. It's not like they're trying to set up that Samara is a lying liar who lies, since the whole thing passes without comment. So what's the point of telling us that there were only three?

Modifié par AlanC9, 14 août 2013 - 05:43 .

[AlanC9]

3DandBeyond wrote...

Hmm, ME2 loading screens said your choices in ME2 would have huge consequences in ME3 and yet the most important decision (the last one about a very big thing) really boils down to some almost meaningless numbers here or there and which choice requires the most EMS for the bare minimum.  

Low-EMS states aside, of course, since in a low EMS game the CB choice is the most important one in the series.

I don't think Bio had a specific design intent for the CB's consequences when making ME2 (my remark above was about the Ardat-Yakshi side-topic). Just a P/R choice that sounded interesting, with consequences TBD.

[KaiserShep]

Robosexual wrote...
A husk (the clue is in the name) wouldn't do anything once it was released if it was actually a husk. The Collector General shows that it does react and is alive.

Plus it's implied. Synthesis more or less confirms it, and the Awakened Collectors confirm it.

It reacts to the sound, heat and light of the oncoming wave. This is no more implication of its sentience if a mindless insect made the same gestures. As for Synthesis confirming it, the joke is that Synthesis basically adds what wasn't there in the beginning. Example: Kaiji's graybox. The data on that graybox is not actually Kaiji. It's just a VI representation of him encoded with data encrypted into his memories. It's no more Kaiji than a photograph is Kaiji, but then with Synthesis, suddenly it's alive and Kasumi reunites with him. I guess anything is possible if consistencies in lore are no longer a concern.

Modifié par KaiserShep, 14 août 2013 - 05:52 .

[Wolfva2]

3DandBeyond wrote...

iakus wrote...

Mass Effect's continuity is so messed up it changes whenever someone says "Wouldn't it be awesome if..." during a brainstorming session.

There you have it.  If it looks cool or sounds cool, use it.  It doesn't matter if it makes sense or fits the story or anything else.  What matters is coolness.

The collector base should have meant big things in ME3.  Destroy it and Cerberus shouldn't have become so powerful.  Keep it and you've handed Cerberus the galaxy.  I'm realistic enough to know that this would have made for a very difficult bifurcated story, but BW created that and the build up, I didn't.  If you don't intend for things to matter then don't tell people they will. 

If you made a mistake then well certainly there was a better way to handle it than to have them get the human reaper anyway.  Even some simple story about how they had analysts working on the data but had yet to fully understand it all (but when have they ever used that line).

At the end of ME2, you had Cerberus that could be sort of on the ropes.  They'd spent a lot of money on resurrecting Shepard, making the Normandy, and all that likely in order to get the collector data.  But they get it no matter what.  Great.

I am looking forward to the day when games actually DO branch in wildly varied directions based upon your earlier decisions.  Perhaps where even what seemed to be innocuous decisions at the time (like who you bring with you on a mission, or which door you open first) completely change the game.   When you can have several playthroughs with greatly different play experience.  Dunno if that day will ever come; it's probably never going to be cost effective enough to do that.  But I'm still looking forward to it.

[Wolfva2]

Xilizhra wrote...

StreetMagic wrote...

Xilizhra wrote...

StreetMagic wrote...

I don't know what's worse. Making player choices amount to nothing, or making even their own choices from previous games amount to nothing (like the retconning of Ardat Yakshi, for a small example). I don't think they have a loremaster or "lore bible" like some teams have. It really does seem like a lot of brainstorming.

What AY retcon?

Samara's numbers (her 3 daughters) were pretty off.

I could believe they'd be a little off, but not to the extent it turned out. Or am I mistaken about something? Are the banshees not former Ardat Yakshi?

Samara was directly contradicted in ME2 by both the codex and a line on the Citadel, when a turian food merchant claims that a certain condiment was made at an Ardat-Yakshi monastery by sad, tortured blue souls. I think Samara's dialogue was from an earlier draft that they forgot to change. Either way, no retcon.

Yes, because as we all know a merchant would NEVER lie!  Or make up a claim!  By the way, I've got this nice low mileage car to sell you cheap!  See, this little old lady only drove it down the block to Church on Sundays!  HONEST!  It's a steal!  

Mockery aside, yeah; I think Samara's dialogue was just a standard BW SNAFU.  People seem to forget this is a game, not a history lesson <LOL>.

[AlanC9]

Yep. Outright incoherence in ME2's lore is a possibility I ignored. I should know better.

[Gold Dragon]

I always thought that the Ardat-Yakshi, as defined by Morinth: a being who kills by mating, to be rare, but the gene that creates it was a fair bit more common.  Thus both Samara and ME3 were correct, since they were talking of different things.


As for the CB, I had hoped for more ramifications, but....

[Wolfva2]

StreetMagic wrote...

Wolfva2 wrote...

Mockery aside, yeah; I think Samara's dialogue was just a standard BW SNAFU.  People seem to forget this is a game, not a history lesson <LOL>.

Have you never discussed RPGs like this before? This is par for the course. You're always mocking it, but people generally talk about setting and lore consistency. Even more to the point, they especially talk about it on the Story and Campaign Discussion sections of RPG gaming sites.

Nope.  Very first time in my life EVER.  Thanks for pointing that out, I wasn't aware that people actually discussed stuff. 

THAT mockery aside... <LOL>  Yeah, of course I know it.  I also know people are just going over the same old topics over and over again because there really isn't much else TO talk about right now.  So?   I'm doing the same thing.  Sheesh, I hope no one EVER takes my advice to heart on treating it as a meaningless game...if they did the forums would dry up and wither away!  Won't stop me from mockery though; after all, that's my particular role in this drama.  I'm the foil that keeps this from being a bunch of people going, "Well yeah.  We uh, all agree.  Huh." That, too, can kill a forum pretty fast.

Besides, nothing wrong with a little Devil's advocacy now and then.  Contrasting viewpoints help us hone our arguments and understand our own points better.  Well those of us interested in actual debate anyways.

[David7204]

So, anyone have any bright ideas of how the base could have been integrated better?

[Wolfva2]

StreetMagic wrote...

Wolfva2 wrote...

[Sheesh, I hope no one EVER takes my advice to heart on treating it as a meaningless game...if they did the forums would dry up and wither away!  Won't stop me from mockery though; after all, that's my particular role in this drama.

Fair enough. It just seems like out of place here at times. Like you're trying to make people feel ashamed or something. If it's all a joke, I'll keep it in mind.

Yeah, sometimes I even annoy myself.  And I'm not even joking about that.  When I get that bad, simply reply with, "Dont' be pedantic" and I'll probably slap myself in the face and back off.  Unless I wasn't, in which case I'll verbally smack you in the face and the fight'll be on like usual!

[3DandBeyond]

AlanC9 wrote...

3DandBeyond wrote...

Hmm, ME2 loading screens said your choices in ME2 would have huge consequences in ME3 and yet the most important decision (the last one about a very big thing) really boils down to some almost meaningless numbers here or there and which choice requires the most EMS for the bare minimum.  

Low-EMS states aside, of course, since in a low EMS game the CB choice is the most important one in the series.

I don't think Bio had a specific design intent for the CB's consequences when making ME2 (my remark above was about the Ardat-Yakshi side-topic). Just a P/R choice that sounded interesting, with consequences TBD.

Yeah I understand you were talking about the ardat-yakshi, I was relating it to the topic.  And sure consequences to be determined but that was a mantra for the game.  Choices matter, which means consequences.  They may not have had specific intent for anything, but they had a general idea of if not what exactly would happen, what the effect should be.  They didn't have an idea how this would happen but they knew that it should be big.  But we didn't even have to be told that it should be big.  The last and biggest decision should have had a profound effect on the things Cerberus knew and where they'd go with it.  It doesn't.

As far as other stuff-the AY in particular.  I'm not even thinking retcon.  I think they overlooked it.  I think the project had a very poor manager and people didn't pay attention to that lore bible.  I think that happened with a lot of things.  The AY thing was such a minor one and could have been easily handled.  Say the other daughter died in protecting the monastery or whatever.  As far as the rarity of them that is a big issue, but sort of understandable if you consider that people have often denied the presence of those with deformities or embarassing ailments, and people with genetic defects were often hidden away and not spoken of.  That's the only explanation for the number of Banshees we encounter.