606 réponses à ce sujet

[txgoldrush]

StreetMagic wrote...

txgoldrush wrote...

Draining Dragon wrote...

Sacrifice was never a primary theme of Mass Effect.

The primary theme was unity. That would be why, you know, we were cleaning up everybody's back yards for them.

Wrong...unity is far from the primary theme

ME2 did not even have this theme and ME1, the theme can be subverted.

And
its not part of the final conflict between Shepard and the Reapers.
Unity at best is a major sub theme, a secondary theme, not a primary
one.

Unity isn't a part of the final conflict with the Reapers? The whole premise of the game and success of the final battle rests on how much of the galaxy's combined badassery can be united and brought to bear on the Reapers. Even the big mcguffin that is the Crucible is a combined effort and last shot attempt at unifying the galaxy to construct that behemoth. No one even knows wtf the Crucible is, but they know they need to work together. Your biggest foe is the human splinter group Cerberus who doesn't want unity, and who symbolize everything you're not trying to do.

Its not part of the "conflict" in a protagonist vs antagonist sense. Its part of the story, yes, its an important subtheme....but unity does not define the conflict between Shepard and the Reapers, in which the Catalyst embodies all of. Sacrifice however...does....as the conflict is a method conflict not a motive conflict.

Modifié par txgoldrush, 17 juin 2013 - 07:28 .

[txgoldrush]

Finn the Jakey wrote...

txgoldrush wrote...

Draining Dragon wrote...

Sacrifice was never a primary theme of Mass Effect.

The primary theme was unity. That would be why, you know, we were cleaning up everybody's back yards for them.

Wrong...unity is far from the primary theme

ME2 did not even have this theme and ME1, the theme can be subverted.

And its not part of the final conflict between Shepard and the Reapers. Unity at best is a major sub theme, a secondary theme, not a primary one.

So how was sacrifice a bigger theme in ME1 and 2?

Who said I was saying sacrifice was the main theme of the entire series?

[txgoldrush]

StreetMagic wrote...

txgoldrush wrote...

StreetMagic wrote...

txgoldrush wrote...

Draining Dragon wrote...

Sacrifice was never a primary theme of Mass Effect.

The primary theme was unity. That would be why, you know, we were cleaning up everybody's back yards for them.

Wrong...unity is far from the primary theme

ME2 did not even have this theme and ME1, the theme can be subverted.

And
its not part of the final conflict between Shepard and the Reapers.
Unity at best is a major sub theme, a secondary theme, not a primary
one.

Unity isn't a part of the final conflict with the Reapers? The whole premise of the game and success of the final battle rests on how much of the galaxy's combined badassery can be united and brought to bear on the Reapers. Even the big mcguffin that is the Crucible is a combined effort and last shot attempt at unifying the galaxy to construct that behemoth. No one even knows wtf the Crucible is, but they know they need to work together. Your biggest foe is the human splinter group Cerberus who doesn't want unity, and who symbolize everything you're not trying to do.

Its not part of the "conflict" in a protagonist vs antagonist sense. Its part of the story, yes, its an important subtheme....but unity does not define the conflict between Shepard and the Reapers. Sacrifice however...does....as the conflict is a method conflict not a motive conflict.

I think you like your own playthrough and want to make me part of it. Destroying the Reapers has nothing to do with sacrifice. Maybe you took another route.

If you want to hook up PayPal accounts and give me $60, you can speak for my game. Otherwise, mine was different.

You are not getting it.

Tell me, is unity the main driving force in the conflict between Shepard and the Reapers?

Or is it the Reapers actions? Why is their conflict?

Modifié par txgoldrush, 17 juin 2013 - 07:34 .

[hpjay]

Benchpress610 wrote...

hpjay wrote...

Benchpress610 wrote...

It’s always amused me how some people attribute to piece of writing a meaning that was never intended by the writer.

 

It matters less what the autor put there and matters more what the reader/player finds there.  Read Robert Frost's Stopping by Woods on a Snowy Evening.  That poem is rich with interpretation.  It means allot of different things to alot of different people.  But to Frost it was simply a poem about a guy going thru the woods...  he didn't intend any deeper meaning.

Well I don’t know how Frost felt about it, but if I was to write something, I would put it in a way that it was fully understood and interpreted in the way I intended. I would be very upset at myself and my writing abilities if people all of the sudden started drawing things out of it that I never meant.
 It all hinges in the quality of the writer. But then again, Frosts and Kafkas don’t grow on trees.

Edited for clarity

 

Some might say the best art is that which allows the observer to find their own personal connection and meaning in a work.  I'm pretty sure I don't see the same thing that Monet might have seen when looking at his Water Lillies studies.  The idea that the observer/reader/player brings their own view and interpratation is perhaps doubly important for something like a video game as the player is actually an agent and a participant in the game insofor as the player can make choices that affect the game.  

I'd go one further and say that BioWare is good at introducing ambiguity in their stories such that the story can maintain several different interpretations amongst serveral different users.  Think of a Paragon Shep vs a Renagade Shep...  much different playthroughs with much different flavor and nuance in how events are portrayed.  Some will latch on to the motivations of Sacrifice and that will fuel their Shepard thru the story.  For others its Unity.  Personally, I'm going thru another trilogy playthru and I'm struck by how strong the theme of racism echoes through-out the entire story (I'm about halfway thru ME2).  

Now, are the writers' intentions importatnt.  Sure they are.  And you can go full bore and argue about what the writers intended (and hope that all the various writers involved were of a single mind and in total areement about what they wanted the story to say or not say.  Otherwise, can you imagine the mess if the different writers involved in ME had different ideas about which themes they thought were most important?).  But if your talking about what the story meant then you have to allow for personal interpretations. 

[Angry_Elcor]

David7204 wrote...

I've been on this forum for 15 months. I've seen ever complaint there is. I've seen countless threads shrieking about the Catalyst, countless arguments against him. And they're nonsense. They're clearly the result of players instinctively hating him and trying to clumsily justify that hate somehow.

Everyone else is wrong and he is right. He keeps saying it over and over, why aren't the rest of you listening to him? He's making it as easy to understand as he can: everyone except him is wrong. See? Simple.

[Angry_Elcor]

txgoldrush wrote...

You are not getting it.

As far as mantras go, it's not the worst. Could still use some work, though.

[jkflipflopDAO]

txgoldrush wrote...

Because they fail to even pinpoint the central conflict, especially with the Catalyst.

The ending is NOT about organics and synthetics, its about sacrifice.

Why?

Because that's what the central conflict revolves around. In fact, organics and synthetics theme only matters in the synthesis ending. The central conflict is one of METHOD not MOTIVE. In fact, Shepard really doesn't argue to the motives, he argues against his methods. This is why you can't go...."well, Starchild, geth and quarian peace can prove you wrong" because that simply is not the conflict Shepard has with him, the conflict is his cycle.

Also, the TIM conflict is not about destroying the Reapers or controlling them (although it can be with a Paragon) its about once again, not only his methods, but that they are counterproductive (as well as he is indoctrinated).

This is the protagonist and antagonist conflict.......the protagonist is willing to sacrifice himself or herself to preserve the galaxy and the ones they love, and call for others to sacrifice not without thought or feeling. The antagonists, both TIM and the Catalyst, ruthlessly sacrifice lives to pursue their goals and motives, with no thought whatsoever. THIS IS THE CONFLICT. And the entire Catalyst conversation shows the Catalyst's character flaw, he simply doesn't truly understand organics and their are hints of this throughout the conversation, especially if Shepard dissents some of the choices.

This is the central conflict not only of the ending, not only of Mass Effect 3, but the entire trilogy. But nope, BSNers don't recognize the obvious, harping on the Catalyst's motives while completely ignoring Shepards arguments in the end. Nevermind the Catalyst's creation strikes at the heart another theme, people are willing to create or harness things that they do not understand to pursue their goals and solutions to problems, backfiring due to lack of understanding.

This is why Shepard had to sacrifice to fire the Crucible, the themes define him as such.

So when anti enders say that the themes of the ending come out of nowhere, they really do not get it.

This reads like it's the first time you tried cocaine. It's a hell of a drug.

[Anthadlas]

Had to post this in the last thread and it is still relevant here

Insanity: Repeating the same thing over and over and expecting different results.

Doesn't matter how many times you restart this thread or claim that people "just don't get it" in what now seems to be your own personal catchphrase, They are not going to change there minds or agree with you.

It is bad writing and most people on this board see that:
It seems you are the one who doesn't quite get it.

[CronoDragoon]

Wraith 02 wrote...

Had to post this in the last thread and it is still relevant here

Insanity: Repeating the same thing over and over and expecting different results.

Doesn't matter how many times you restart this thread or claim that people "just don't get it" in what now seems to be your own personal catchphrase, They are not going to change there minds or agree with you.

It is bad writing and most people on this board see that:
It seems you are the one who doesn't quite get it.

First, that has nothing to do with insanity. It's a catchy proverb that makes no sense.

Second, what does that say about all the people who keep posting "ending is crap" threads? Same thing, right?

[spirosz]

txgoldrush wrote...

unity

conflict

Shepard

Reapers

Think about it.  

[Anthadlas]

CronoDragoon wrote...

Wraith 02 wrote...

Had to post this in the last thread and it is still relevant here

Insanity: Repeating the same thing over and over and expecting different results.

Doesn't matter how many times you restart this thread or claim that people "just don't get it" in what now seems to be your own personal catchphrase, They are not going to change there minds or agree with you.

It is bad writing and most people on this board see that:
It seems you are the one who doesn't quite get it.

First, that has nothing to do with insanity. It's a catchy proverb that makes no sense.

Second, what does that say about all the people who keep posting "ending is crap" threads? Same thing, right?

Yes people still complaining about the ending are insane, doesn't change the fact that it was still bad.

But that is just an opinion and I am not creating threads trying to convince other people that my opinion is absolute fact and that they don't understand it, Unlike the OP.

goldrush needs to realise that other people are entitled to their own views on the ending and that insulting and trolling them will not make his views more valid then anybody elses

Modifié par Wraith 02, 17 juin 2013 - 06:59 .

[CronoDragoon]

Wraith 02 wrote...

Yes people still complaining about the ending are insane, doesn't change the fact that it was still bad.

It doesn't? Why should I believe insane people telling me something is bad?

[Anthadlas]

CronoDragoon wrote...

Wraith 02 wrote...

Yes people still complaining about the ending are insane, doesn't change the fact that it was still bad.

It doesn't? Why should I believe insane people telling me something is bad?

Because the majority of people who think the ending is bad are not still creating threads about it and therefore are not insane.
 
The select few still whining about it are if they think it will change anything

Plus you shouldn't believe anybody elses opinion, feel free to have your own on the ending but don't bother wasting your time trying to prove your opinions on it are correct to people who don't agree

Modifié par Wraith 02, 17 juin 2013 - 07:06 .

[CronoDragoon]

Wraith 02 wrote...

Because the majority of people who think the ending is bad are not still creating threads about it and therefore are not insane.

In that case, the majority of Mass Effect fans who either liked or disliked the endings don't even post here, which makes all of us insane.

Plus you shouldn't believe anybody elses opinion, feel free to have your own on the ending but don't bother wasting your time trying to prove your opinions on it are correct to people who don't agree

People should always be open to having their opinions changed.

[Anthadlas]

CronoDragoon wrote...

[People should always be open to having their opinions changed.

Yes they should, but that doesn't mean other people should try to force their opinions upon others.

It's clear you like the ending and i'm not interesting in debating that point with you
It's also clear that I am not going to change my opinion on the matter as I have made my mind up.

My only reason to be in this thread is to protest the OP's arrogance in believing that his opinion is fact and that everybody who thinks the ending is bad is wrong and is too stupid to understand it.

Thats the great things about opinions, they are all different and none of them are fact, None of them are right or wrong. But creating a thread for the sole purpose of trying to devalue other peoples opinion whilst validating your own is wrong.

[Seboist]

Cthulhu42 wrote...

I'm too lazy to read through all these pages; has txgoldrush given an explanation for how the main theme of ME3 is sacrifice when almost all of the potential sacrifices can be avoided yet?

It's quite the hoot that guy is saying that the same series where you can turn a veteran criminal into a social worker with a couple of words and survive a "suicide" mission without losing anybody is about "sacrifice".

[CronoDragoon]

Wraith 02 wrote...

It's clear you like the ending and i'm not interesting in debating that point with you
It's also clear that I am not going to change my opinion on the matter as I have made my mind up.

Actually I don't like the endings. My opinion is the definition of "mixed bag". I just find it dubious that you call people who like the endings insane for still posting threads about it - because the endings are "clearly bad". Yet you don't realize that asserting this is contrary to your proclamations about opinions and not "forcing" an opinion on others. You seem to think there is some difference in principle to posting a thread that forces an opinion on others and replying with a post that forces an opinion on others. There is no such difference.

Modifié par CronoDragoon, 17 juin 2013 - 07:23 .

[Anthadlas]

CronoDragoon wrote...

Wraith 02 wrote...

It's clear you like the ending and i'm not interesting in debating that point with you
It's also clear that I am not going to change my opinion on the matter as I have made my mind up.

Actually I don't like the endings. My opinion is the definition of "mixed bag". I just find it dubious that you call people who like the endings insane for still posting threads about it - because the endings are "clearly bad". Yet you don't realize that asserting this is contrary to your proclamations about opinions and not "forcing" an opinion on others. You seem to think there is some difference in principle to posting a thread that forces an opinion on others and replying with a post that forces an opinion on others. There is no such difference.

I am forcing my opinion on nobody, and I didn't say people who like the endings posting threads about it are insane.

Find a single post where i said that.

I said people who continue to create threads on the ending thinking it will change the opinion of others is insane, That is my opinion and I am not forcing you to believe it.
Don't twist my words

Modifié par Wraith 02, 17 juin 2013 - 07:31 .

[CronoDragoon]

Wraith 02 wrote...
I am forcing my opinion on nobody

Oh?

It is bad writing and most people on this board see that:
It seems you are the one who doesn't quite get it.

Do you not understand that this is the exact same thing the OP is doing, only you are on the other side of the argument?

Modifié par CronoDragoon, 17 juin 2013 - 07:33 .

[Nole]

All I get from this thread is:

People that liked the ending think that they are smarter than the ones that hated it because they "understand" the ending.
People that hated the ending think they are smarter that the ones that liked it because they see the plotholes.