142 réponses à ce sujet

[Erez Kristal]

Destroy - We destroy them or they destroy us!

IT/Nightmare/Virtual Reality/Remake- The sooner we get to that beacone we can all wake up!

Refuse - Fight for survival in a doomed world!

http://social.biowar...91/polls/45712/ - Poll

Modifié par erezike, 18 mai 2013 - 11:22 .

[Ajensis]

Why a second round? Is it an elimination kind of thing where you take away the option least voted for and create a new one? Let me save you the trouble: Destroy will win :-P

Also, I don't see how 'We destroy them or they destroy us!' is relevant for Destroy being a preferred ending to build a hypothetical sequel on. It's simply an argument for choosing Destroy in the first place.

[Erez Kristal]

Ajensis wrote...

Why a second round? Is it an elimination kind of thing where you take away the option least voted for and create a new one? Let me save you the trouble: Destroy will win :-P

Also, I don't see how 'We destroy them or they destroy us!' is relevant for Destroy being a preferred ending to build a hypothetical sequel on. It's simply an argument for choosing Destroy in the first place.

A second round is good for a more conclusive victory. the " we destroy them or they destroy us" is one the famous pro destroy sentences.  I felt it reflected the no compromise attidue in the best way. 

[Clayless]

Destroy will win, this is BSN. Genocide is the most moral path to peace apparently.

[jstme]

Correction:
Destroy will win, this is BSN.Afterall, It is the most moral path among crappy ME3 ending choices. 

[Erez Kristal]

Seems like "IT/Nightmare/Virtual Reality/Remake" is putting up a good fight.

[Erez Kristal]

where is all the campaign banter and propaganda? what are the key strengths of each cannidate? :innocent:

Modifié par erezike, 18 mai 2013 - 03:57 .

[KingZayd]

Robosexual wrote...

Destroy will win, this is BSN. Genocide is the most moral path to peace apparently.

We learned from the best.

[Eryri]

erezike wrote...

where is all the campaign banter and propaganda? what are the key strengths of each cannidate? :innocent:

Okey dokey, I'll do my best.

Friends, Romans, Countrymen! Lend me your attention as I make the case for "the theory that dare not speak it's name", (using a bit of copying and pasting from the previous thread.)

The current ending choices are too divergent. They will be a millstone around Bioware's neck if they ever wish to write a sequel. They cannot possibly make a game that could adapt itself to importing the three options, and if they canonise just one, it will annoy proponents of the other two. The adoption of IT would allow Bioware to backtrack from that disastrous mistake and reset things.

It would also have the benefit of restoring a shred of dignity and menace to the Reapers. Without IT, the Reapers appear to make error after error in their inept attempts to prevent their own destruction. They absent mindedly forget that the Citadel controls the Relay network, and they have the power to strand the Crucible in the middle of nowhere. They install a back door into the heart of their empire, and forget to lock it when Shepard arrives. Harbinger apparently can't hit the broad side of a barn, as he ignores the Normandy, and fails to kill a prone Shepard flopping around on the ground like a fish. The Reapers seem unfit to organise a ******-up in a brewery, let alone a cycle of galactic genocide. The war was the Reaper's to lose, not Shepard's to win, and by gum, they worked hard at losing it!

IT, or the revelation that the Crucible is (like the Citadel itself) a Reaper designed trap, would mitigate or remove these problems. Shepard and the Alliance would be exactly where the Reapers want them to be. They become worthy, cunning adversaries again, instead of faintly pathetic, miss-programmed robots.

Resetting the ending would also offer an opportunity for TIM to have a more interesting fate than "death by persuade check", or renegade interrupt.

Yes, retcons and resets are often awkward, but the alternatives are those dreaded abominations "prequels" and "spin-offs". Do you like the idea of "Kai Leng-The Early Years"? Because Mac Walters apparently does!

And that brings me to the last reason for voting for IT. Many people object to it because it gives Bioware too much credit. It lets them off the hook for churning out a crappy ending, and then expecting us to pay more to see the "real" end of the story. Perhaps thats true. I personally am agnostic about whether Bioware intended IT or not. I'd like to think that they did, because the alternative is accepting that they thought Slavery / Eugenics / Genocide was a good way to round off their jolly space opera. But, if you are angry with Bioware, then you don't have to "believe" in IT, in order to support it. Because what better way to insult the writing team, than to "reject their reality and substitute our own"? What better way to stick it to Walters and co, then to reject their nihilistic message of the impossibility of tolerance between peoples without ludicrous green space magic, as nothing more than a bizarre hallucination?

And with that, I commend my proposal to the BSN.

Modifié par Eryri, 18 mai 2013 - 06:35 .

[AlanC9]

Wow; if IT wins, this series really does need to die.

OTOH, I'm not sure it makes sense to aggregate remakes and IT into the same choice. Doesn't matter for me since I loathe both of them.

Modifié par AlanC9, 18 mai 2013 - 05:58 .

[Erez Kristal]

AlanC9 wrote...

Wow; if IT wins, this series really does need to die.

OTOH, I'm not sure it makes sense to aggregate remakes and IT into the same choice. Doesn't matter for me since I loathe both of them.

You have to understand that many players felt that in the third episode the control over shepard was taken away from them. but its hard to put in the past the extremly wondeful time they had in me1&me2 It give everyone a comfortable way out.

This is a battle between forget it ever happened and move on to forget it ever happened and lets try again. http://www.metacriti...-3/user-reviews http://www.metacriti...c/mass-effect-2

[AlanC9]

My point was that the game can't simultaneously be IT and be a reboot. Do those players really not care which one it is? I can't tell myself, obviously, since I hate both of those options.

[SpamBot2000]

AlanC9 wrote...

Wow; if IT wins, this series really does need to die.

OTOH, I'm not sure it makes sense to aggregate remakes and IT into the same choice. Doesn't matter for me since I loathe both of them.

Looks like you're the vocal minority on this one.

[Eryri]

AlanC9 wrote...

My point was that the game can't simultaneously be IT and be a reboot. Do those players really not care which one it is? I can't tell myself, obviously, since I hate both of those options.

May I ask why you dislike IT? This is a sincere question by the way, I'm genuinely curious.

[Erez Kristal]

AlanC9 wrote...

My point was that the game can't simultaneously be IT and be a reboot. Do those players really not care which one it is? I can't tell myself, obviously, since I hate both of those options.

IT or other follies are the smoother ways to do a reboot for me3 its easiest way out. now since in me3 your past decisions didnt really matter and shepard control was taken away from you. it wouldnt be that harmful to do a remake to me3 that disregard its all as a dream where you decisions didnt really matter...
(besides the genophage an the geth/quarrian what decisions were they in me3? )

[DarkNova50]

If they want future installments to resemble the original trilogy, then I think that Destroy is the best way to do that. The Reapers are dead, most everybody else is alive and has repaired their technology, and there's even the possibility of Shepard surviving, under the right circumstances.

I think that Control could make for an interesting storyline too, however. If Shepard's noble intentions carried over to the Reapers at first, but then slowly became corrupted to the point where he/she creates some sort of oppressive Empire, installing him/herself at the top (in a cloned body, perhaps?) I doubt they'd go for that, though, because it's a wild departure from the original games, and if it wasn't done just right it would be an absolute disaster.

[sH0tgUn jUliA]

Hell, I'm going IT on this just because it's so... well... I love it. It's the Matrix. If he could get Mac to go along with it Hudson would love it.

[AresKeith]

Robosexual wrote...

Destroy will win, this is BSN. Genocide is the most moral path to peace apparently.

Also I voted IT/others because I actually liked the concept behind it

Modifié par AresKeith, 18 mai 2013 - 09:40 .

[Erez Kristal]

Destroy and refuse need more people to speak for why they think its the right choice. so far they are lagging behind.

[Jadebaby]

voted IT the same as I did in the first round...

Why can't we get a mehem ending as canon?

[hiraeth]

Seeing as how IT can, in a sense, redo the ending (whereas presumably a sequel would pick up destroy/refusal after the ending we got), I'll go for IT.

[Jadebaby]

IT wouldn't redo anything...

It would only just invalidate the other choices....

It's wonderful.

[Erez Kristal]

Jadebaby wrote...

IT wouldn't redo anything...

It would only just invalidate the other choices....

It's wonderful.

It offers a glance back... it all depends on point it is decided shepard wakes up. is it the little orb he pick up in firewalker? is it after arrival and the exposure to the reaper artifact, is it on earth in the run to the beam or is it an entire different place. its up for bioware to decide.

[masster blaster]

Voted IT. Been supporting IT ever since Byne created the thread, and pretty much know the full run down.

[Megaton_Hope]

Anything that denies the physical reality of the preceding games would be bad to a degree that there aren't words for.