418 réponses à ce sujet

[xlegionx]

dreamgazer wrote...

Wait, what's this about the Amsih?

They're luddites, essentially. Or at least they refuse technology, not destroy it. But really they're channeling their inner Wulfs

[Eterna]

dreamgazer wrote...

Wait, what's this about the Amish?

The Amish are just the worst posters on BSN. 

[ruggly]

Eterna5 wrote...

dreamgazer wrote...

Wait, what's this about the Amish?

The Amish are just the worst posters on BSN. 

truely awful, same with those mennonites.

[MassivelyEffective0730]

dreamgazer wrote...

KaiserShep wrote...

Is there such a thing as a rational Luddite?

Sure.  Think about people's grandparents and their resistance to technology.

I wouldn't call my dad's refusal to use netflix, or claim that old technology is better than new rational.

And he used to fly the old S-3 Viking back in the 80's.

Modifié par MassivelyEffective0730, 22 juin 2013 - 02:22 .

[dreamgazer]

MassivelyEffective0730 wrote...

dreamgazer wrote...

KaiserShep wrote...

Is there such a thing as a rational Luddite?

Sure.  Think about people's grandparents and their resistance to technology.

I wouldn't call my dad's refusal to use netflix, or claim that old technology is better than new rational.

And he used to fly the old S-3 Viking back in the 80's.

I wouldn't call it irrational either, at least in my experience. Stubborn and frustrating? Sure.

[teh DRUMPf!!]

Greylycantrope wrote...

Not really no, an example: -
"You have altered the variables."
That's great but all I really take away from this is that you gave him more stuff to consider when formating a solution.
-"I can't make them happen. If there is to be a new solution, you must act."
So you sprung these new variables on him in the last minute and he needs your help to implement one of them then and there, partly because he lacks the physical component to do so and secondly becauses he's unsure which solution would be the best to implement right now. One way or the other synthesis is seen as inevitable by him so in his view really either option you pick you'll there at some point just in a different manner.
-"The Crucible will not descriminate" Yes beacuse the Crucible is the device you use to implement these changes not the one the determines what they are.

I could go on but I find this a bit of a moot point for reasons I'll explain later.

Again, I'm taking these quotes entirely at face-value. So for all intents and purposes, "The Crucible will not descriminate" only means... the Crucible will not descriminate. Is the reason for that because the Catalyst implemented the changes and determined the options? We cannot know that. Again, focus only on what we can know.

Otherwise, we start entering IT-territory. No one wants that.

As to the last part -- it helped me discern Crucible from Citadel, as I understand it now.

Alright but that's fairly irrelevent when you consider both you and the view point your arguing agains agree that the Crucible and Citadel work in tandem to some degree. The question is which one creates the solutions, no what their physical placement is.

Put very simply, I think: Crucible = solutions (via energy-dispersal), Citadel = transport (sends energy in/out relays).

Just keep in mind what you write, you've managed to establish a very condesending tone for the entire discussion right off the bat. I'm not saying I'm personally offended but if you really want to talk with people in earnest about a topic probably best to keep that in mind.

As I said, 'bit of an "edge" to my posts. You all know me.

It's not disbelief it's pure context. Sraight from the people building the device "the Catalyst is the key on how to focusing that energy."

... which entirely fits the scenario I have outlined, to a "t" - !

The Catalyst focuses the energy of the Crucible. The Crucible is a power source, the Catalyst determines how the power it provides and disperses is used.

I'm repeating myself at this point...

It was said, back at Cerberus HQ by Vendetta, that the Catalyst is the Citadel, which is a dark-energy regulator and the control unit of the mass-relays. It was explained that the Crucible incorporates the Citadel because the Crucible alone cannot disperse the energy well enough. Think about that -- the Crucible is built to affect the Reapers, so the blast radius needs to hit them wherever they are. In any given cycle, however, the Reapers are spread through the whole galaxy. It's unlikely the Crucible explosion can cover the whole galaxy. However, this issue is rectified through the Citadel, wrongly identified as the Catalyst. Through it, the energy is focused into the nearest 'relay and directed (read: focused) to travel throughout the relay-connected galaxy, thus affecting all Reaper-invaded territory. Thing is, the Citadel doesn't have a mind of its own to do that. Enter the Catalyst, the Citadel's resident AI.

Your interpretation is that the Catalyst takes the energy and determines how it is used. That does not fit the definition of "focusing." That would better fit "altering," "amending," "changing," maybe even "fixing," but not "focusing."

Subtext is great when your considering the philosophical/moral implications of a presented idea, less so when your talking about the functionality of an in game device that holds no such implications.

In this case of the ending, there is both (context and subtext).

#1 in the OP is 100% context (quotes, all added by EC to make sense of the ending).

#3 is the subtext (literary allegory -- explained in linked thread -- present in both OE and EC).

Yeah but Legion being there was not a definitive aspect of the plot or resolution, hell you can sell the poor bastard later.

The plot railroads him in later -- geth Dreadnought in ME3.

And just as you can reject Legion, you can reject Sync, and even reject all three options from the Crucible.

It's not some much your ability to make sense of it as it is you willingness to put up with it. Not everything is nonsensical but we're not arguing about nonsense just who's in control of creating the options at the end. The Catalyst being in control makes the most sense to me, people don't always like handing over control, but that's how it seems to have been written. I don't find that nonsensical I just don't like that aspect.

What's "written" about seven-eight times over is: "you can use the energy of the Crucible to [insert option here]"

[GreyLycanTrope]

HYR 2.0 wrote...
Again, I'm taking these quotes entirely at face-value. So for all intents and purposes, "The Crucible will not descriminate" only means... the Crucible will not descriminate. Is the reason for that because the Catalyst implemented the changes and determined the options? We cannot know that. Again, focus only on what we can know.

At face value doesn't prove your point though, since I'm stating the Catalyst uses/control to Crucible to implement said soultions. So yeah the Crucible will not desciminate since that's how he set it up.

... which entirely fits the scenario I have outlined, to a "t" - !

Your scenario is that the Crucible=solution, the quoted text states it provides the power and the Catalyst dertermines how that power is used, in other words Crucible= tool, Catalyst=Solutions albeit partly through the tool  we gave him but that's still the basic principle.

It was said, back at Cerberus HQ by Vendetta, that the Catalyst is the Citadel, which is a dark-energy regulator and the control unit of the mass-relays. It was explained that the Crucible incorporates the Citadel because the Crucible alone cannot disperse the energy well enough. Think about that -- the Crucible is built to affect the Reapers, so the blast radius needs to hit them wherever they are. In any given cycle, however, the Reapers are spread through the whole galaxy. It's unlikely the Crucible explosion can cover the whole galaxy. However, this issue is rectified through the Citadel, wrongly identified as the Catalyst. Through it, the energy is focused into the nearest 'relay and directed (read: focused) to travel throughout the relay-connected galaxy, thus affecting all Reaper-invaded territory. Thing is, the Citadel doesn't have a mind of its own to do that. Enter the Catalyst, the Citadel's resident AI.

Your interpretation is that the Catalyst takes the energy and determines how it is used. That does not fit the definition of "focusing." That would better fit "altering," "amending," "changing," maybe even "fixing," but not "focusing."

Right it was built with the consideration that he Citadel was the Catalyst, to concentrate the beam. And the AI is kinda the problem as it's utterly unaccounted for by the design of the Crucible. We have an AI that's capable of turning the Citadel(the think we need to focus the beam) into a Reaper factory and you're saying he has no means of using said object we need add some additional varients on to the intended design of the Citadel in this whole scenario. Your saying that even though we didn't know about the kid or his ability to control the station(which is part of him) our device plugged in and worked just as it was intented. You're aware of how ridiculous that sounds, right?

Actually it does, you know how the kill beam focuses on the Reapers and all synthetics? Yeah, guess who's job it is to focus the energy. And add to that what I already pointed out about his ability to modify the Citadel (random elevators and so forth), it's not that hard to figure out.

The plot railroads him in later -- geth Dreadnought in ME3.

And just as you can reject Legion, you can reject Sync, and even reject all three options from the Crucible.

I was gonna reply to this, but I'm honestly not sure how we digressed into this discussion, or what we're even arguing about at this point, wasn't this originally about synthesis being a wild guess for Crucible implementation?

What's "written" about seven-eight times over is: "you can use the energy of the Crucible to [insert option here]"

When has anyone said the energy didn't come from the Crucible?

[teh DRUMPf!!]

Greylycantrope wrote...

HYR 2.0 wrote...
Again, I'm taking these quotes entirely at face-value. So for all intents and purposes, "The Crucible will not descriminate" only means... the Crucible will not descriminate. Is the reason for that because the Catalyst implemented the changes and determined the options? We cannot know that. Again, focus only on what we can know.

At face value doesn't prove your point though, since I'm stating the Catalyst uses/control to Crucible to implement said soultions. So yeah the Crucible will not desciminate since that's how he set it up.

Do you know what face-value means? It means you take the information as it's given to you.

"The Crucible does not descriminate" means: the Crucible does not descriminate. That's it. Period. Finito.

We are not told why it does not descriminate. We cannot know if -- as you say -- it's because the Catalyst implements the solutions as he wants them, or -- as I say -- the Crucible's options were set in stone before the Catalyst and he has no control over it. Do not worry about this. Focus on the information we are given from that quote.

Therein lies the key distinction between my interpretation and others who disagree entirely. The quote I've provided (the information we can know) proves that the Destroy option comes at least in part from the Crucible. On the flip side, there is nothing within that quote -- nada, nihl, zero, zilch -- to support the notion that the Catalyst has any hand whatsoever in determining the effects of the Destroy option as it's given to you. Even better, there are no quotes in the entirety of the ending that support the notion that the Catalyst created any RGB option as its given to you.

THAT is why I dare say that I'm right about this and others are wrong. I can support my claims with at least something. I can not support the other side even if I wanted to, because I can't find anything to prove it. Something > Nothing.

Your scenario is that the Crucible=solution, the quoted text states it provides the power and the Catalyst dertermines how that power is used, in other words Crucible= tool, Catalyst=Solutions albeit partly through the tool  we gave him but that's still the basic principle.

Your quote states that the Catalyst is the key to "focusing" the energy.

You have taken that to mean that the Catalyst controls the effects of the energy...

... which is fine, except it doesn't fit the definition of "focusing" whatsoever, so the quote doesn't support your case.

Right it was built with the consideration that he Citadel was the Catalyst, to concentrate the beam. And the AI is kinda the problem as it's utterly unaccounted for by the design of the Crucible. We have an AI that's capable of turning the Citadel(the think we need to focus the beam) into a Reaper factory

Wait.

We do find out the Citadel is a Reaper factory, but we never learned that the Catalyst personally did the reaping.

Continue...

and you're saying he has no means of using said object we need add some additional varients on to the intended design of the Citadel in this whole scenario.

Yes.

Your saying that even though we didn't know about the kid or his ability to control the station(which is part of him) our device plugged in and worked just as it was intented.

Wait.

We do know the station is part of him, but not that he actually controls it.

A lot of others fall into that same pitfall -- "it's part of him, so he must control it." Those same people then wonder, "well, if he controls it, why do the Reapers need the Keepers to open the Citadel for them (and return from dark space??"

The answer to that is simple: maybe he doesn't control it! He never expressly said he does, only the Reapers.

Continue...

You're aware of how ridiculous that sounds, right?

To you? Yes, I think I have an idea.

Better question: why should I care? It's far from the only ridiculous thing the story has produced.

If I told you the prothean soldier Shepard uncovered on Eden Prime learned how to speak English in 1 second by Shepard touching him -- scratch that, it was his armor that Shepard actually touched -- I'm aware it would sound ridiculous. However, it would not change the fact that that's exactly what happened (if, again, you take the canon at face-value).

Actually it does, you know how the kill beam focuses on the Reapers and all synthetics?

It kills the Reapers and all synthetics because it does not focus on anything. Hence, "does not descriminate."

Yeah, guess who's job it is to focus the energy.

I draw the line of "focusing the energy" guiding them into the relays. Everything else is outside his power, IMO.

And add to that what I already pointed out about his ability to modify the Citadel (random elevators and so forth)

If the Catalyst controls the "elevator" that brought Shepard up to his chamber, then why -- on Low-EMS runs -- does the Catalyst ask Shepard "Why are you here?" rather than tell him "Wake up." - ? Maybe, as I said, he doesn't control everything on the Citadel.



IT NEVER ENDS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

That's how you have to think if you want to "get" ME3's ending, though.

There are no safe assumptions. Second-guess everything you intuitively believe. Do not overthink. Do not underthink.

Modifié par HYR 2.0, 22 juin 2013 - 06:29 .

[SpamBot2000]

KaiserShep wrote...

Is there such a thing as a rational Luddite?

You're going to argue that industrial technology didn't displace the artisan way of production? The Luddites of the 1810's were fully correct in their concerns. That would suggest a greater degree of rationality than starry-eyed tech utopians are capable of. 

Modifié par SpamBot2000, 22 juin 2013 - 06:32 .

[111987]

I agree with the OP, though I still think it is odd that the technology for all three things existed in the Crucible. UNLESS of course it was the Leviathans responsible for the Crucible, in which case there aren't many problems with the Crucible. At least to my mind.

[KaiserShep]

SpamBot2000 wrote...

KaiserShep wrote...

Is there such a thing as a rational Luddite?

You're going to argue that industrial technology didn't displace the artisan way of production? The Luddites of the 1810's were fully correct in their concerns. That would suggest a greater degree of rationality than starry-eyed tech utopians are capable of. 

Those particular Luddites died quite a long time ago, so they don't really count anymore. Typically it tends to just mean small-minded; simply opposed to increased industrialization or new technology. It doesn't necessarily involve a threat to their livelihood anymore.

Think of it the way one uses the word Philistine. Obviously no one is using the word to mean a member of non-Semetic people of ancient Palestine. 

Modifié par KaiserShep, 22 juin 2013 - 09:05 .

[SpamBot2000]

No, calling someone a "luddite" is just a typical bullying tactic of labeling someone as a person to be ignored. It's no different than the Politburo denouncing "bourgeois reactionaries". The word has barely any legitimate meaning beyond its use to automatically invalidate anyone less than "110%" enthusiastic about any particular development. It's just verbal violence, and deplorable as such.

Modifié par SpamBot2000, 22 juin 2013 - 10:30 .

[Erez Kristal]

sH0tgUn jUliA wrote...

It is amazing how as soon as this massively overpowered "game over" sized force entered the galaxy this Crucible design suddenly popped up on Mars.

Looking back to 2010 and 2011 with the reapers doing their thing every 50,000 years for a billion + years and being as overpowered as Sovereign, and given the reasonable amount of time of 20 years to build a fleet to counter Sovereign's design to stand a chance Shepard would have been in her early 50s, and a damn the budget we'll sort it out later attitude, we might have stood a chance. Now you would have had lines like "I'm too old for this s***!" flying, but still. But they made the journey in 3 years, completely overpowered but had to be dumb as rocks to compensate, because we'd been as dumb as rocks. What do you expect?

HYR 2.0. You're overthinking this. The Crucible is there because there was no other way to win the game. If the writer didn't put it there they might as well have put right after "We fight or we die" -- Critical Mission Failure: Game Over; You Lose. Shortest game ever.

Reapers in story... not innocent. Starboy.... not innocent. Guilty as charged. Do you understand?

The hard truth. this is how i imagined things in me2.
I thought we will have more time to prepare.

[Eryri]

erezike wrote...

sH0tgUn jUliA wrote...

It is amazing how as soon as this massively overpowered "game over" sized force entered the galaxy this Crucible design suddenly popped up on Mars.

Looking back to 2010 and 2011 with the reapers doing their thing every 50,000 years for a billion + years and being as overpowered as Sovereign, and given the reasonable amount of time of 20 years to build a fleet to counter Sovereign's design to stand a chance Shepard would have been in her early 50s, and a damn the budget we'll sort it out later attitude, we might have stood a chance. Now you would have had lines like "I'm too old for this s***!" flying, but still. But they made the journey in 3 years, completely overpowered but had to be dumb as rocks to compensate, because we'd been as dumb as rocks. What do you expect?

HYR 2.0. You're overthinking this. The Crucible is there because there was no other way to win the game. If the writer didn't put it there they might as well have put right after "We fight or we die" -- Critical Mission Failure: Game Over; You Lose. Shortest game ever.

Reapers in story... not innocent. Starboy.... not innocent. Guilty as charged. Do you understand?

The hard truth. this is how i imagined things in me2.
I thought we will have more time to prepare.

Agreed. They escalated the Reaper story too quickly by letting them back into the galaxy. It made for good pre-release trailers, but a disastrous story progression. I suspect that some bright spark in EA's marketing department came up with the tagline "Take Earth Back", and they wrote the story to fit. Or the writing team had watched far too many Michael Bay movies and wanted a plot with lots of explosions.

Modifié par Eryri, 22 juin 2013 - 12:08 .

[Mcfly616]

Wait....someone thinks that Destroy/Synthesis/Control are the Catalyst's choices?

[Mcfly616]

Eryri wrote...

erezike wrote...

sH0tgUn jUliA wrote...

It is amazing how as soon as this massively overpowered "game over" sized force entered the galaxy this Crucible design suddenly popped up on Mars.

Looking back to 2010 and 2011 with the reapers doing their thing every 50,000 years for a billion + years and being as overpowered as Sovereign, and given the reasonable amount of time of 20 years to build a fleet to counter Sovereign's design to stand a chance Shepard would have been in her early 50s, and a damn the budget we'll sort it out later attitude, we might have stood a chance. Now you would have had lines like "I'm too old for this s***!" flying, but still. But they made the journey in 3 years, completely overpowered but had to be dumb as rocks to compensate, because we'd been as dumb as rocks. What do you expect?

HYR 2.0. You're overthinking this. The Crucible is there because there was no other way to win the game. If the writer didn't put it there they might as well have put right after "We fight or we die" -- Critical Mission Failure: Game Over; You Lose. Shortest game ever.

Reapers in story... not innocent. Starboy.... not innocent. Guilty as charged. Do you understand?

The hard truth. this is how i imagined things in me2.
I thought we will have more time to prepare.

Agreed. They escalated the Reaper story too quickly by letting them back into the galaxy. It made for good pre-release trailers, but a disastrous story. I suspect that some bright spark in EA's marketing department came up with the tagline "Take Earth Back", and they wrote the story to fit. Or the writing team had watched far too many Michael Bay movies and wanted a plot with lots of explosions.

I disagree. The Reapers didn't invade nearly quickly enough. The Reapers should've invaded and the war should've began at some point during ME2. That way Bioware wouldn't have had to fit the entire Invasion/War/Resolution into a single videogame.

Instead we got a glorified side-story of a plot which turned out to be a complete stalling action due to the fact that absolutely zero progress was made in ME2. After the Suicide Mission we are at the exact same point we were at after ME1. I blame ME2's pointlessness. Hell, I give ME3 credit for what it managed to accomplish in a single game with what little it had to work with coming from ME2. The fact of the matter is, the war should've been spread out over two games atleast.

Modifié par Mcfly616, 22 juin 2013 - 12:12 .

[GreyLycanTrope]

[quote]HYR 2.0 wrote...
Do you know what face-value means? It means you take the information as it's given to you.
[/quote]
And apparantly baltantly ignoring other information given to you outside this one scene...

[quote]
"The Crucible does not descriminate" means: the Crucible does not descriminate. That's it. Period. Finito.

We are not told why it does not descriminate. We cannot know if -- as you say -- it's because the Catalyst implements the solutions as he wants them, or -- as I say -- the Crucible's options were set in stone before the Catalyst and he has no control over it. Do not worry about this. Focus on the information we are given from that quote.

Therein lies the key distinction between my interpretation and others who disagree entirely. The quote I've provided (the information we can know) proves that the Destroy option comes at least in part from the Crucible. On the flip side, there is nothing within that quote -- nada, nihl, zero, zilch -- to support the notion that the Catalyst has any hand whatsoever in determining the effects of the Destroy option as it's given to you. Even better, there are no quotes in the entirety of the ending that support the notion that the Catalyst created any RGB option as its given to you.
[/quote]
"Adaptive in it's design" is not nothing, adaptive means it can be used outside it's intended purpose.

[quote]
THAT is why I dare say that I'm right about this and others are wrong. I
can support my claims with at least something. I can not support the
other side even if I wanted to, because I can't find anything to prove
it. Something > Nothing.
[/quote]
.......I'm sorry but that's just really egotistical. Every theory and interpretation has something to support it, you don't have more backing your assertions than other people.

[quote]
Your quote states that the Catalyst is the key to "focusing" the energy.

You have taken that to mean that the Catalyst controls the effects of the energy...

... which is fine, except it doesn't fit the definition of "focusing" whatsoever, so the quote doesn't support your case.
[/quote]
Amongst other things, I don't see it as resticted solely to that. What the quote basically tells you is that whatever you want to use the Crucibles energy for it has to go through the Catalyst first. When the Catalyst is a bit more than you initally expected, it complicated the matter a bit more than, "Well it just needs something to flow into the mass relay network." That everyone is confused when the Crucible doesn't fire after docking supports that things aren't working as intended, again he can turn the thing off, that goes beyond simple focus.

[quote]
We do find out the Citadel is a Reaper factory, but we never learned that the Catalyst personally did the reaping.
[/quote]
He turned the Leviathans in a Reaper, he can clearly initiate the process directly if need be. Unless your saying he has no control over his own station. I can understand him being dormant with the rest of the Reapers and needing the Keepers to wake them up initally, but past that it be really foolish of him not to have control over certain aspects of the station which are apparently needed to carry out his inital plan.
[quote]
We do know the station is part of him, but not that he actually controls it.

A lot of others fall into that same pitfall -- "it's part of him, so he must control it." Those same people then wonder, "well, if he controls it, why do the Reapers need the Keepers to open the Citadel for them (and return from dark space??"

The answer to that is simple: maybe he doesn't control it! He never expressly said he does, only the Reapers.
[/quote]
Right, Shepard just happens to pass out on the one plate that happens to be fully automated. There's suspending disbelief and then there's throwing dropping it out the window, you really need do the latter to take the scenario as you're suggesting. As stated above he could be dormant which is why he needs the Keepers initally, past that though...he's a machine, a very advanced one, he should some basic motor contorls over what is effectively his body.

[quote]
To you? Yes, I think I have an idea.

Better question: why should I care? It's far from the only ridiculous thing the story has produced.
[/quote]
You should care since you're trying to present an idea and show why it has merit.
[quote]
If I told you the prothean soldier Shepard uncovered on Eden Prime learned how to speak English in 1 second by Shepard touching him -- scratch that, it was his armor that Shepard actually touched -- I'm aware it would sound ridiculous. However, it would not change the fact that that's exactly what happened (if, again, you take the canon at face-value).
[/quote]
Because the story went through lengths to explain the process and continued to use it in the previously established manner. Javik can continue to sense things about people through inanimate objects, Grunt/Jack's rooms etc. The key to sci-fi is to do thing that wouldn't be believeavle in real life but work because you went through the effort of explaing how the process works through expostions not contradictive ambiguity. That's how fictional concepts can work if they are properly establish within their own context. That's biotics, the prothean's seneroy ability, rachni telepathy, Thorian spores, are all explain and referenced at some point outside the inital plot related encounters and why they largely work, while the Crucible doesn't.

[quote]
It kills the Reapers and all synthetics because it does not focus on anything. Hence, "does not descriminate."
[/quote]
If that was the case it would kill everything, it's certainly capable of it as scene in the lower EMS variants, it doesn't descriminate between organics and synthetics at all. Doesn't descriminate just means it doesn't soley target the Reapers, that's the entire purpose of that line.


[quote]
I draw the line of "focusing the energy" guiding them into the relays. Everything else is outside his power, IMO.
[/quote]
And in my opinion it isn't

[quote]
If the Catalyst controls the "elevator" that brought Shepard up to his chamber, then why -- on Low-EMS runs -- does the Catalyst ask Shepard "Why are you here?" rather than tell him "Wake up." - ? Maybe, as I said, he doesn't control everything on the Citadel.
[/quote]
Obvious answer is that he's curious why the meatbags are actively trying to messing with his stuff. He's more curtious in the Higher EMS varient since he can do more with the Crucible that's largely intact(he can now fullfill his desired solution hurray) as opposed to the ones that's not. Think about it, if he's just there to facilitate the whims of the Crucible design his disposition shouldn't change at all, which is only true of one aspect of the scenario, he'll still get rather upset with you if you shoot him in the lower EMS variant, so he still wants a new solution even if it's not his ideal.

[quote]


IT NEVER ENDS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

That's how you have to think if you want to "get" ME3's ending, though.

There are no safe assumptions. Second-guess everything you intuitively believe. Do not overthink. Do not underthink.
[/quote]
A bunch of different interpreations, most of which contradict each other, all of which have flaws, and none that can be taken as defninitive. Yet we still have people shouting that they get things better than others.....gee I wonder why people find that entire concept annoying.

Modifié par Greylycantrope, 22 juin 2013 - 12:21 .

[Eryri]

Mcfly616 wrote...

I disagree. The Reapers didn't invade nearly quickly enough. The Reapers should've invaded and the war should've began at some point during ME2. That way Bioware wouldn't have had to fit the entire Invasion/War/Resolution into a single videogame.

Instead we got a glorified side-story of a plot which turned out to be a complete stalling action due to the fact that absolutely zero progress was made in ME2. After the Suicide Mission we are at the exact same point we were at after ME1. I blame ME2's pointlessness. Hell, I give ME3 credit for what it managed to accomplish in a single game with what little it had to work with coming from ME2. The fact of the matter is, the war should've been spread out over two games atleast.

I agree that the Reaper war should not have been crammed into just one game. But I would have addressed that by turning the series into a quadrilogy. Or even an ongoing series. They could have kept the Reapers at bay, trapped in darkspace for a few more installments (or even permanently), and come up with new and unrelated threats for the intervening games. 

The problem with bringing the Reapers back even earlier in ME2, is that it makes ME1's final battle pointless. If the Reapers are able to get back from darkspace with such little effort, then why did Sovereign risk its own life by charging into the Citadel to reactivate the main relay? ME1 only makes sense if darkspace is too vast for even the Reapers to easily cross.

They could, perhaps, have had a smaller invasion for ME3. Perhaps Harbinger and a handful of other powerful Reapers could have canibalised the energy and eezo reserves of their subordinates to enable them to make the long trek back to the galaxy? When they finally made it here they could have been damaged by over extending their engines and running on fumes, making it much more of a fair fight, which the Council species could have won conventionally or at least without the Crucible.

Modifié par Eryri, 22 juin 2013 - 12:24 .

[Mcfly616]

Eryri wrote...

Mcfly616 wrote...

I disagree. The Reapers didn't invade nearly quickly enough. The Reapers should've invaded and the war should've began at some point during ME2. That way Bioware wouldn't have had to fit the entire Invasion/War/Resolution into a single videogame.

Instead we got a glorified side-story of a plot which turned out to be a complete stalling action due to the fact that absolutely zero progress was made in ME2. After the Suicide Mission we are at the exact same point we were at after ME1. I blame ME2's pointlessness. Hell, I give ME3 credit for what it managed to accomplish in a single game with what little it had to work with coming from ME2. The fact of the matter is, the war should've been spread out over two games atleast.

I agree that the Reaper war should not have been crammed into just one game. But I would have addressed that by turning the series into a quadrilogy. Or even an ongoing series. They could have kept the Reapers at bay, trapped in darkspace for a few more installments (or even permanently), and come up with new and unrelated threats for the intervening games. 

The problem with bringing the Reapers back even earlier in ME2, is that it makes ME1's final battle pointless. If the Reapers are able to get back from darkspace with such little effort, then why did Sovereign risk its own life by charging into the Citadel to reactivate the main relay?
.

I see no reason to turn it into a "quadrilogy" when it was announced as a trilogy and could've easily worked as a trilogy had ME2 not spun its wheels in the mud. Having the Reaper Invasion occur halfway through ME2 wouldn't have belittled ME1's ending in any way whatsoever. Who said they made it from Dark Space with little effort? It's not like the game has to make the Reapers invade 6 months after the events of ME1. Hell, ME2 could've started 2 years afterwards. Problem solved.

A lot of people blame ME3 for not being well-thought-out. I blame ME2 for not being thought out at all, and being a detriment to the overall narrative of the entire trilogy.

[Kel Riever]

Eterna5 wrote...

dreamgazer wrote...

Wait, what's this about the Amish?

The Amish are just the worst posters on BSN. 

[Eryri]

Mcfly616 wrote...

I see no reason to turn it into a "quadrilogy" when it was announced as a trilogy and could've easily worked as a trilogy had ME2 not spun its wheels in the mud. Having the Reaper Invasion occur halfway through ME2 wouldn't have belittled ME1's ending in any way whatsoever. Who said they made it from Dark Space with little effort? It's not like the game has to make the Reapers invade 6 months after the events of ME1. Hell, ME2 could've started 2 years afterwards. Problem solved. 

Not really. 2 years is still a short time if you happen to be an immortal, million year old, sentient starship. It still makes Sovereign seem foolish by revealing the Reaper's existance, when the most sensible thing for him to do would be to lay low until the other Reapers can quietly make their way to the galaxy, and then launch a surprise attack. 

[Mcfly616]

Eryri wrote...

Mcfly616 wrote...

I see no reason to turn it into a "quadrilogy" when it was announced as a trilogy and could've easily worked as a trilogy had ME2 not spun its wheels in the mud. Having the Reaper Invasion occur halfway through ME2 wouldn't have belittled ME1's ending in any way whatsoever. Who said they made it from Dark Space with little effort? It's not like the game has to make the Reapers invade 6 months after the events of ME1. Hell, ME2 could've started 2 years afterwards. Problem solved. 

Not really. 2 years is still a short time if you happen to be an immortal, million year old, sentient starship. It still makes Sovereign seem foolish by revealing the Reaper's existance, when the most sensible thing for him to do would be to lay low until the other Reapers can quietly make their way to the galaxy, and then launch a surprise attack. 

yeah? I never said 2 years wasn't a short time to a billion year old Reaper. It took them 3 years to travel from Dark Space to the Milky Way. Annnnd....the only reason they did such a thing is because Sovereign failed. I dont think Sovereign seems foolish. Why lay low? They are above the concerns of us mere mortals. Nobody even believed he was a damn Reaper lol. Had Sovereign succeeded, the invasion would've occured as it always has. And we would've been hit with the surprise attack from hell. The Protheans obviously altered things.

[Eckswhyzed]

Eryri wrote...

The problem with bringing the Reapers back even earlier in ME2, is that it makes ME1's final battle pointless. If the Reapers are able to get back from darkspace with such little effort, then why did Sovereign risk its own life by charging into the Citadel to reactivate the main relay? ME1 only makes sense if darkspace is too vast for even the Reapers to easily cross.

Erm, in ME1 it was stated that one of they key advantages of the Citadel trap is that the Reapers can then take control of the Citadel and use all of the data inside it to make the harvesting easier. Not to mention killing everyone in the galactic government in one blow.

[Eryri]

Mcfly616 wrote...

Why lay low?

Because an individual Reaper, while powerful, is not invulnerable. As Sovereign discovered.

He accomplished nothing during his suicidal charge, that he could not have achieved anyway with a little patience. 

All he succeeded in doing was warning the Council species of the Reapers existance. Had the council not been so utterly stupid, that might have posed a problem for the Reapers.

[Mcfly616]

Eryri wrote...

Mcfly616 wrote...

Why lay low?

Because an individual Reaper, while powerful, is not invulnerable. As Sovereign discovered.

He accomplished nothing during his suicidal charge, that he could not have achieved anyway with a little patience. 

All he succeeded in doing was warning the Council species of the Reapers existance. Had the council not been so utterly stupid, that might have posed a problem for the Reapers.

umm he most certainly would've achieved something he couldn't have otherwise. See the post above yours.

Also: controlling the mass relay network

Modifié par Mcfly616, 22 juin 2013 - 01:14 .