865 réponses à ce sujet

[IanPolaris]

jtav wrote...

People begged for a refuse option that led to defeat. It was a matter of role-playing, not success or failure. The game as a whole would have to be redone to make a conventional victory work. You spend the entire game gathering resources fir the Crucible and a not-inconsiderable percentage of your assets are related to the Crucible.

So why do you get the 'refuse' ending if you shoot the starkid?  (A bullet couldn't possibly hurt a hologram and everyone knows it).

Puhleeze.  This was an obvious BW 'nerdrage' reaction to "Understated Nerdrage" where the commentator while lamblasting the starkid had his avatar shoot it repeatedly to make the point.

-Polaris

[MegaSovereign]

Well, shooting him basically implies rejection if nothing else.

It could also be a "gameplay vs story" issue. I could reject the premise of Control and Synthesis through Renegade dialogue and still end up choosing them. Shooting the Catalyst could be there because Bioware thought that having the ability to refuse using the Crucible post-conversation is important.

I doubt they spent resources crafting the Refusal ending just to spite players. Kind of contradicts the goal of the Extended Cut..

Modifié par MegaSovereign, 25 juin 2013 - 02:17 .

[IanPolaris]

MegaSovereign wrote...

Well, shooting him basically implies rejection if nothing else.

It could also be a "gameplay vs story" issue. I could reject the premise of Control and Synthesis through Renegade dialogue and still end up choosing them. Shooting the Catalyst could be there because Bioware thought that having the ability to refuse using the Crucible post-conversation is important.

I doubt they spent resources crafting the Refusal ending just to spite players. Kind of contradicts the goal of the Extended Cut..

Actually I can easily see the Devs adding an ending just to spite people given that Bioware didn't want to make the EC in the first place. 

You know what would have made the Refusal ending great?  Not that the Reapers don't win, but if we saw our assets going down in a final hopeless battle, then saw Liara's time capsule, and then saw an unspecified fleet beating the unholy crud out of a helpless Reaper Fleet in darkspace that wouid have done it.  Essentially it would have been "we lose so the next cycle can win without selling it's soul to the reapers" ending.

However, Bioware didn't want that.  It wanted to spite the fans that picked refuse by not only having Shepard lose ignobably but by having the next cycle use the crucible and pick Synthesis anyway thus rendering the entire ending moot.

Shame on you,Bioware.

-Polaris

Edit PS:  Torquing off those that didn't accept the starkid is not automatically contrary to the EC esp when you consider that the EC was not a DLC that the bioware devs wanted to make and only did "because we were too simple too 'get it'"

Modifié par IanPolaris, 25 juin 2013 - 02:25 .

[Cainhurst Crow]

o Ventus wrote...

Darth Brotarian wrote...

My spleen is part of me. Does that mean I can make it do backflips and handstands on a whime?

I don't know about you, but my spleen isn't capable of independent thought. The Catalyst is.

Nevermind that, like I said, the Catalyst straight-up tells you that it controls the Reapers. Like, verbatim.

If you're going to make a sh**ty comparison, at least make are the subject of said comparison shows traits similar to that of what it's being compared to.

Just because the citadel is part of him doesn't mean he controls it, let alone controls it like harbinger does his pawns. The protheans disabled the signal to the keepers to make them activate the relay. That is what we know. Just becasue the signal comes from the catalyst, and not from dark space, doesn't change the fact that the keeprs no longer recieve the signal to activate the relay. The protheans thought the signal originated from one place, when it in truth originated from another. Doesn't change what they did, and how it played out, so I don't see the problem here.

[Cainhurst Crow]

o Ventus wrote...

AlanC9 wrote...

I thought we were talking about controlling the Citadel Relay, not the Reapers.

Does it make a difference?

Yes it does, seeing as how we are told why the signal to activate the relay and not need sovereign isn't being recieved by the keepers.

[WhiteKnyght]

IanPolaris wrote...

You know what would have made the Refusal ending great?  Not that the Reapers don't win, but if we saw our assets going down in a final hopeless battle, then saw Liara's time capsule, and then saw an unspecified fleet beating the unholy crud out of a helpless Reaper Fleet in darkspace that wouid have done it.  Essentially it would have been "we lose so the next cycle can win without selling it's soul to the reapers" ending.

However, Bioware didn't want that.  It wanted to spite the fans that picked refuse by not only having Shepard lose ignobably but by having the next cycle use the crucible and pick Synthesis anyway thus rendering the entire ending moot.

Shame on you,Bioware.

-Polaris

That's why I don't really take haters seriously. You people don't think.

1. There are so many war assets in the game that what you're saying would be out of their budget to produce and would amount to hours of pointless cutscenes that most people would skip over.

2. I've never heard it said anywhere that they did choose synthesis in the next cycle. Just that Liara's beacon gave them what they needed to win.

3. Of course they used the Crucible. It's been put plainly by the ME writers since Mass Effect 1 that there is no beating the Reapers conventionally. It took a combined assault of several fleets to bring one Reaper down, and that was after Shepard glitched it into dropping its shields, and after it had annihilated half of said fleets.

[MegaSovereign]

IanPolaris wrote...

MegaSovereign wrote...

Well, shooting him basically implies rejection if nothing else.

It could also be a "gameplay vs story" issue. I could reject the premise of Control and Synthesis through Renegade dialogue and still end up choosing them. Shooting the Catalyst could be there because Bioware thought that having the ability to refuse using the Crucible post-conversation is important.

I doubt they spent resources crafting the Refusal ending just to spite players. Kind of contradicts the goal of the Extended Cut..

Actually I can easily see the Devs adding an ending just to spite people given that Bioware didn't want to make the EC in the first place. 

You know what would have made the Refusal ending great?  Not that the Reapers don't win, but if we saw our assets going down in a final hopeless battle, then saw Liara's time capsule, and then saw an unspecified fleet beating the unholy crud out of a helpless Reaper Fleet in darkspace that wouid have done it.  Essentially it would have been "we lose so the next cycle can win without selling it's soul to the reapers" ending.

However, Bioware didn't want that.  It wanted to spite the fans that picked refuse by not only having Shepard lose ignobably but by having the next cycle use the crucible and pick Synthesis anyway thus rendering the entire ending moot.

Shame on you,Bioware.

-Polaris

You're making a ton of assumptions on motivation.

I don't believe any developer would burn time and resources on something with the intention of spiting players.

Edit PS:  Torquing off those that didn't accept the starkid is not
automatically contrary to the EC esp when you consider that the EC was
not a DLC that the bioware devs wanted to make and only did "because we
were too simple too 'get it'

It's impossible to consider when they've never actually said that.

[MassivelyEffective0730]

The Grey Nayr wrote...

That's why I don't really take haters seriously. You people don't think.

Well, a good step to taking you seriously would be to not go around branding people as non-thinkers because they have a different opinion.

I remember an argument I had with you over whether or not free will is universal and if everyone has it.

You said that the less intelligence a person has, the less freewill he is entitled to. 

I could say that you don't think either in that circumstance.

[spirosz]

The Grey Nayr wrote...
That's why I don't really take haters seriously. You people don't think.

ROFL. 

[IanPolaris]

Darth Brotarian wrote...

o Ventus wrote...

Darth Brotarian wrote...

My spleen is part of me. Does that mean I can make it do backflips and handstands on a whime?

I don't know about you, but my spleen isn't capable of independent thought. The Catalyst is.

Nevermind that, like I said, the Catalyst straight-up tells you that it controls the Reapers. Like, verbatim.

If you're going to make a sh**ty comparison, at least make are the subject of said comparison shows traits similar to that of what it's being compared to.

Just because the citadel is part of him doesn't mean he controls it, let alone controls it like harbinger does his pawns. The protheans disabled the signal to the keepers to make them activate the relay. That is what we know. Just becasue the signal comes from the catalyst, and not from dark space, doesn't change the fact that the keeprs no longer recieve the signal to activate the relay. The protheans thought the signal originated from one place, when it in truth originated from another. Doesn't change what they did, and how it played out, so I don't see the problem here.

Except we are already shown that the starkid DOES control the citadel in multiple scenes....

-Polaris

[Cainhurst Crow]

IanPolaris wrote...

Darth Brotarian wrote...

o Ventus wrote...

Darth Brotarian wrote...

My spleen is part of me. Does that mean I can make it do backflips and handstands on a whime?

I don't know about you, but my spleen isn't capable of independent thought. The Catalyst is.

Nevermind that, like I said, the Catalyst straight-up tells you that it controls the Reapers. Like, verbatim.

If you're going to make a sh**ty comparison, at least make are the subject of said comparison shows traits similar to that of what it's being compared to.

Just because the citadel is part of him doesn't mean he controls it, let alone controls it like harbinger does his pawns. The protheans disabled the signal to the keepers to make them activate the relay. That is what we know. Just becasue the signal comes from the catalyst, and not from dark space, doesn't change the fact that the keeprs no longer recieve the signal to activate the relay. The protheans thought the signal originated from one place, when it in truth originated from another. Doesn't change what they did, and how it played out, so I don't see the problem here.

Except we are already shown that the starkid DOES control the citadel in multiple scenes....

-Polaris

He raised one elevator. That's hardly opening the citadels arms and activating the mass relay inside of it. Which, we are told, he was specifically stopped from doing by vigil. Vigil may not have known it wasn't sovereign sending the signal, but the signal was still stopped regardless.

Modifié par Darth Brotarian, 25 juin 2013 - 02:47 .

[IanPolaris]

The Grey Nayr wrote...

IanPolaris wrote...

You know what would have made the Refusal ending great?  Not that the Reapers don't win, but if we saw our assets going down in a final hopeless battle, then saw Liara's time capsule, and then saw an unspecified fleet beating the unholy crud out of a helpless Reaper Fleet in darkspace that wouid have done it.  Essentially it would have been "we lose so the next cycle can win without selling it's soul to the reapers" ending.

However, Bioware didn't want that.  It wanted to spite the fans that picked refuse by not only having Shepard lose ignobably but by having the next cycle use the crucible and pick Synthesis anyway thus rendering the entire ending moot.

Shame on you,Bioware.

-Polaris

That's why I don't really take haters seriously. You people don't think.

Nice ad hominem there.  I respect you more already.

1. There are so many war assets in the game that what you're saying would be out of their budget to produce and would amount to hours of pointless cutscenes that most people would skip over.

Hardly.  The Refuse ending was HALF as long as any other ending, and we have what?  A max of six primary fleets?  A few seconds per fleet/resource (perhaps even combined) is not all that much.

2. I've never heard it said anywhere that they did choose synthesis in the next cycle. Just that Liara's beacon gave them what they needed to win.

Gamble on twitter said this speaking as the official Bioware rep.  This is canon.

3. Of course they used the Crucible. It's been put plainly by the ME writers since Mass Effect 1 that there is no beating the Reapers conventionally. It took a combined assault of several fleets to bring one Reaper down, and that was after Shepard glitched it into dropping its shields, and after it had annihilated half of said fleets.

No, there was no way this cycle could beat the Reapers conventionally because too many opportunities were squandered.  Give the next cycle even 10,000 years to prep, knowing the crucible doesn't work, and having a heads up not only on Reaper Tech but how it trapped this cycle, and things likely would be very, very different.

At the very least it could be,and denying the player that is really lame and leaves a bad taste in my mouth. It's bioware's writers saying, "You can win the game, but only if you win it my way."  If that's to be the case, then don't call Mass Effect an RPG at all.

-Polaris

[IanPolaris]

Darth Brotarian wrote...

IanPolaris wrote...

Darth Brotarian wrote...

o Ventus wrote...

Darth Brotarian wrote...

My spleen is part of me. Does that mean I can make it do backflips and handstands on a whime?

I don't know about you, but my spleen isn't capable of independent thought. The Catalyst is.

Nevermind that, like I said, the Catalyst straight-up tells you that it controls the Reapers. Like, verbatim.

If you're going to make a sh**ty comparison, at least make are the subject of said comparison shows traits similar to that of what it's being compared to.

Just because the citadel is part of him doesn't mean he controls it, let alone controls it like harbinger does his pawns. The protheans disabled the signal to the keepers to make them activate the relay. That is what we know. Just becasue the signal comes from the catalyst, and not from dark space, doesn't change the fact that the keeprs no longer recieve the signal to activate the relay. The protheans thought the signal originated from one place, when it in truth originated from another. Doesn't change what they did, and how it played out, so I don't see the problem here.

Except we are already shown that the starkid DOES control the citadel in multiple scenes....

-Polaris

He raised one elevator. That's hardly opening the citadels arms and activating the mass relay inside of it. Which, we are told, he was specifically stopped from doing by vigil. Vigil may not have known it wasn't sovereign sending the signal, but the signal was still stopped regardless.

He also turned off the crucible and closed the citadel.

-Polaris

Edit PS:  Come on Darth, give it up.  Even the writers admitted that this is in fact a plot hole (as is the ME1 conduit) because the writers when they made the scene forgot all about ME1.

Modifié par IanPolaris, 25 juin 2013 - 02:50 .

[AlanC9]

o Ventus wrote...

Vigil tells us exactly what they did. The protheans scientists severed the connection between the Keepers and the Citadel, thus necessitating Sovereign using Saren to access the controls manually.

Thy didn't cut off the Catalyst from the Citadel.

Watch the scene again. Everything Vigil says there is speculation, as he freely admits. He never received any information from the Citadel, since the Conduit was a one-way link.

Modifié par AlanC9, 25 juin 2013 - 02:50 .

[IanPolaris]

MegaSovereign wrote...

Edit PS:  Torquing off those that didn't accept the starkid is not
automatically contrary to the EC esp when you consider that the EC was
not a DLC that the bioware devs wanted to make and only did "because we
were too simple too 'get it'

It's impossible to consider when they've never actually said that.

They didn't use those exact words, but they DID say that in the press release that announced the EC.  Bioware made it very clear that they didn't think they did anything wrong with the endings, but because others "didn't understand it", they would go 'halfway' out of the goodness of their hearts.  I could cut the condescending attitude in that press release with a knife.

-Polaris

[Slayer299]

As soon as the explosion about the original endings came out and BW's response was my first clue-in, but the final nail was the 'clarity & closure' which was all that *everyone* wanted to make the endings better.

[AlanC9]

MassivelyEffective0730 wrote...

Hell, depending on how you play your Shepard, you know that he could be doomed from the start, or you know he's going to make it at the end.  That's how my story is. My Shepard is a survivor who always overcomes. He's a fighter who will always fight to the bitter end. And my story is the uplifting tale of bringing a galaxy together and uniting it as one. He was always going to live.

This strikes me as an awfully weird approach to an RPG, until you're on the fouth or fifth playthrough and there's nothing left to do but metagame.

What about actually role-playing and taking whatever comes?

[MegaSovereign]

IanPolaris wrote...

MegaSovereign wrote...

Edit PS:  Torquing off those that didn't accept the starkid is not
automatically contrary to the EC esp when you consider that the EC was
not a DLC that the bioware devs wanted to make and only did "because we
were too simple too 'get it'

It's impossible to consider when they've never actually said that.

They didn't use those exact words, but they DID say that in the press release that announced the EC.  Bioware made it very clear that they didn't think they did anything wrong with the endings, but because others "didn't understand it", they would go 'halfway' out of the goodness of their hearts.  I could cut the condescending attitude in that press release with a knife.

-Polaris

Maybe they didn't think they did anything inherently wrong. I think they're entitled to that train of thought. However they were never condescending about it. "Clarity and Closure" were the buzzwords of the EC. Not "the ending was too complicated for you savages" or however you're trying to spin it.

[AlanC9]

IanPolaris wrote...
So why do you get the 'refuse' ending if you shoot the starkid?  (A bullet couldn't possibly hurt a hologram and everyone knows it).

Puhleeze.  This was an obvious BW 'nerdrage' reaction to "Understated Nerdrage" where the commentator while lamblasting the starkid had his avatar shoot it repeatedly to make the point.

-Polaris

Really? It wasn't obvious to me. OTOH, shooting the Catalyst is so idiotic that I don't really appreciate why a player would do it.

[dreamgazer]

IanPolaris wrote...

The Grey Nayr wrote...

2. I've never heard it said anywhere that they did choose synthesis in the next cycle. Just that Liara's beacon gave them what they needed to win.

Gamble on twitter said this speaking as the official Bioware rep.  This is canon.

They used the Crucible in the future cycle, yes, but I'm pretty sure he didn't say what option was chosen. 

[AlanC9]

IanPolaris wrote...
  Give the next cycle even 10,000 years to prep, knowing thinking the crucible doesn't work, and having a heads up not only on Reaper Tech but how it trapped this cycle, and things likely would be very, very different.

Fixed. The Crucible works.

[Cainhurst Crow]

IanPolaris wrote...

Darth Brotarian wrote...

IanPolaris wrote...

Darth Brotarian wrote...

o Ventus wrote...

Darth Brotarian wrote...

My spleen is part of me. Does that mean I can make it do backflips and handstands on a whime?

I don't know about you, but my spleen isn't capable of independent thought. The Catalyst is.

Nevermind that, like I said, the Catalyst straight-up tells you that it controls the Reapers. Like, verbatim.

If you're going to make a sh**ty comparison, at least make are the subject of said comparison shows traits similar to that of what it's being compared to.

Just because the citadel is part of him doesn't mean he controls it, let alone controls it like harbinger does his pawns. The protheans disabled the signal to the keepers to make them activate the relay. That is what we know. Just becasue the signal comes from the catalyst, and not from dark space, doesn't change the fact that the keeprs no longer recieve the signal to activate the relay. The protheans thought the signal originated from one place, when it in truth originated from another. Doesn't change what they did, and how it played out, so I don't see the problem here.

Except we are already shown that the starkid DOES control the citadel in multiple scenes....

-Polaris

He raised one elevator. That's hardly opening the citadels arms and activating the mass relay inside of it. Which, we are told, he was specifically stopped from doing by vigil. Vigil may not have known it wasn't sovereign sending the signal, but the signal was still stopped regardless.

He also turned off the crucible and closed the citadel.

-Polaris

Edit PS:  Come on Darth, give it up.  Even the writers admitted that this is in fact a plot hole (as is the ME1 conduit) because the writers when they made the scene forgot all about ME1.

The citadels in an entirely different system than it was before. How exactly would the conduit be able to connect to it when it's no longer where it's suppose to be? I'm not sure, but I don't think mass relays can just up and connect to a point when it's radically been shifted, at least I hope they can't. If that's the case, and planetary positions, locations, and general space and time mean nothing to them functioning, than I will say that mass effect is much less logical than many people here claim, since that makes no damn sense. Come to think of it, how are they able to phase objects through solid matter when they fire them? And how is it they can slow them down right before exiting to match the same speed and trajectory they had before they entered the realy, as we have been shown with the conduit. Is it stated that mass relays can phase you through solid matter without any problems? If so, why the hell would you consider anything space magic after that point? You have phasing technology that works instantly, how the hell do you doubt anything after that? Come to think of it, do we even know the catalyst closes the citadel? Or if it's just automatically closing due to the massive energy spike or something akin to a full system reboot to the entire structure? Refuse nevers shows the citadel closing, and neither does synthesis. Only in control, which is basically deleting the old operating system of a computer and installing a new one, which could make the entire citadel effectively shut down to reboot. I don't even know at this point, neither do you, and if what you claim is true, neither does anyone on the planet. But if that's the case, what makes your reality more valid than my own? My interpretation of events less valid than yours? Does a plothole of a plothole even mean anything at all?

[IanPolaris]

MegaSovereign wrote...

Maybe they didn't think they did anything inherently wrong. I think they're entitled to that train of thought. However they were never condescending about it. "Clarity and Closure" were the buzzwords of the EC. Not "the ending was too complicated for you savages" or however you're trying to spin it.

Not my spin.  It was the way their PR annoucement was broadly perceived, "We are doing this because you savages don't "get" our artistic vision".

-Polaris

[IanPolaris]

dreamgazer wrote...

IanPolaris wrote...

The Grey Nayr wrote...

2. I've never heard it said anywhere that they did choose synthesis in the next cycle. Just that Liara's beacon gave them what they needed to win.

Gamble on twitter said this speaking as the official Bioware rep.  This is canon.

They used the Crucible in the future cycle, yes, but I'm pretty sure he didn't say what option was chosen. 

I am pretty sure he did specify (or someone did).  Regardless, the use of the crucible at all after Shepard refused was nothing more than a slap in the face of the player.

-Polaris

[IanPolaris]

AlanC9 wrote...

IanPolaris wrote...
So why do you get the 'refuse' ending if you shoot the starkid?  (A bullet couldn't possibly hurt a hologram and everyone knows it).

Puhleeze.  This was an obvious BW 'nerdrage' reaction to "Understated Nerdrage" where the commentator while lamblasting the starkid had his avatar shoot it repeatedly to make the point.

-Polaris

Really? It wasn't obvious to me. OTOH, shooting the Catalyst is so idiotic that I don't really appreciate why a player would do it.

It should be.  Star-kid is clearly a hologram.  (Hint:  You can see right through him and he behaves like a hologram).  Shooting a hologram does nothing (and certainly can't hurt it).  This was BW having a temper tantrum because of Understated Nerdrage IMHO.

-Polaris