1132 réponses à ce sujet

[NeonFlux117]

Fixers0 wrote...

 Basic tactical advice for Military commanders.

“Always endeavor to fight the enemy on your own terms. If you outnumber the foe, use reserves to break through when the enemy’s over-stretched lines collapse. If you are outnumbered, then concentrate your forces so that the enemy can fight only your best troops. If you are powerful at close quarters then engage in dense terrain where your advantage will prove greatest. If you are superior at long range, then attack along an extended front. Remember always, however, that a commander who puts his faith in heavy weaponry alone will be easily outmaneuvered, and a commander who relies on close combat without adequate support will lose his force to disciplined fire. No one has ever won a battle who failed to take advantage of his enemy’s weakness, or take heed of his own.”

Now, that wasn't hard to comprehend, wasn't it? though for the Writers seemingly it was.

Yes, but this is when you're dealing with symetrical warfare and enemy. Where's the reapers fight the war through asymetrical warfare-indoctrination, infiltration and so on. This is also, true of insurgency and fighting terrorism. It's asymetrical warfare, therefore you must think 'outside' the box to defeat them. But that is neither here nor there, so back to the reapers. They are infinite. they have no begining or end. They simply are. It is shown to the player that the reapers cannot be defeated conventially, therefore a mary sue magic I win button- the Catalyst and Crucible, is written in order to end the war and storyline of Shepard and the Reapers. And they did this in one game. Because, within the context of the lore, that we are presented with, The Reapers are unbeatable; although the Leviathan DLC does negate some of the things Sovereign tells you on virmire, but anyways. Yeah, the reapers are unbeatable therefore we must have a Deus Ex Machina narrative device to end the narrative of The Reaper War. 

It makes sense guys, its just is kinda lame and been done before in gaming and works of science fiction. Been done alot, you can call it Lazy but I call it inevitable. It had to end this way. There is no other way. 

Modifié par NeonFlux117, 18 août 2013 - 11:05 .

[David7204]

Darth Brotarian wrote...

David7204 wrote...

What post did you describe potential weaknesses in? Because I don't see any.

A DEM isn't needed to defeat the Reapers as they are. It's unfortunate that ME 3 features the Crucible, but that's evidence after the fact.

Here is my post on the matter sport.

Why would the Reapers spend thousands of years unfolding their plans, giving civilization plenty of time to recognize them and prepare for them? If they really were as powerful?

Why would the Reapers have to rely on speed if they're ancient and incredibly advanced? Shouldn't they have technology and resources that surpassed the galaxy, and thus more powerful ships?

Why would the Reapers be mediocre tacticians if they're ancient and incredibly advanced?

[Reorte]

Darth Brotarian wrote...

David7204 wrote...

As as said, we're at a very ridiculous point if we're seriously claiming that stupid and pointless weaknesses are good writing.

They aren't.

Flawless perfection and no flaws in any field is apparently a sign of a great writer. Because the weaknesses I described aren't stupid or pointless.

They serve a point, the give the players a logical incentive for fighting the reapers and a logcial means of defeating them. It isn't stupid either, not entirely at least, as it provides a way for the reapers to still be as successful at harvesting as they had been, but not so much that a deus ex machina is needed to beat them.

Unfortunately it doesn't let them be as successful as they have been. They've been so successful for so long that as soon as you introduce a flaw that can be exploited it leaves the rather big question of why someone hasn't already found and exploited it.

[Reorte]

NeonFlux117 wrote...

It makes sense guys, its just is kinda lame and been done before in gaming and works of science fiction. Been done alot, you can call it Lazy but I call it inevitable. It had to end this way. There is no other way.

It's been done better too, but going back to the OP it's why the Reaper plot should've been dropped.

[David7204]

No. I don't care how many times it's been done. It's stilI mediocre writing at best. I can do it better.

Modifié par David7204, 18 août 2013 - 11:13 .

[David7204]

In fact, not only am I confident it could be done, I'm confident it could be done with several very difficult restrictions and requirements that not a whole lot of people on the BSN consider. Making my task not only doing what they say is impossible, but doing a task significantly more difficult than what they say is impossible.

[Fixers0]

NeonFlux117 wrote...
Yes, but this is when you're dealing with symetrical warfare and enemy. Where's the reapers fight the war through asymetrical warfare-indoctrination, infiltration and so on. This is also, true of insurgency and fighting terrorism. It's asymetrical warfare, therefore you must think 'outside' the box to defeat them. But that is neither here nor there, so back to the reapers. They are infinite. they have no begining or end. They simply are. It is shown to the player that the reapers cannot be defeated conventially, therefore a mary sue magic I win button- the Catalyst and Crucible, is written in order to end the war and storyline of Shepard and the Reapers. And they did this in one game. Because, within the context of the lore, that we are presented with, The Reapers are unbeatable; although the Leviathan DLC does negate some of the things Sovereign tells you on virmire, but anyways. Yeah, the reapers are unbeatable therefore we must have a Deus Ex Machina narrative device to end the narrative of The Reaper War. 

I Won't dispute that, I will add that it's execution was beyond awfull. But that wasn't my point, It's mainly the lack of competence and tactical insight from Military commander in Mass Effect 3, they just can't seem te get past basic statements such "We need the fleets", "We have to go to Earth" and "The Crucible is the key", perhaps this is what a writer would think but for a military commander it's very unrealistic and contrived.

[Grand Admiral Cheesecake]

StreetMagic wrote...

It's almost painful to see how combative and angry any thread with david becomes. Why? Seriously. Try to imagine we're just a bunch of average Joes talking about different car tire brands or how to make homemade beef jerky. Something pointless and casual and mostly fun. Because that's the realm video games where lie. Pointless, casual, and fun. It's not a Holy War.

It is when the Messiah David7204 gets involved.

Must I post his commandments?

[David7204]

This is not a military story. It never has been. And having strong military themes is unwelcome.

Modifié par David7204, 18 août 2013 - 11:20 .

[Cainhurst Crow]

David7204 wrote...

Darth Brotarian wrote...

David7204 wrote...

What post did you describe potential weaknesses in? Because I don't see any.

A DEM isn't needed to defeat the Reapers as they are. It's unfortunate that ME 3 features the Crucible, but that's evidence after the fact.

Here is my post on the matter sport.

Why would the Reapers spend thousands of years unfolding their plans, giving civilization plenty of time to recognize them and prepare for them? If they really were as powerful?

Why would the Reapers have to rely on speed if they're ancient and incredibly advanced? Shouldn't they have technology and resources that surpassed the galaxy, and thus more powerful ships?

Why would the Reapers be mediocre tacticians if they're ancient and incredibly advanced?

1. Their plans would be pretty much the same as they were presented in mass effect 1, pre mass effect 3 story, in which they apparently caused the rachni wars, provoked the first contact war, possibly influenced countless events through the use of indoctrination, and all in order to prepare the galaxy for it's harvesting when soveriegn finally got the realy connecting dark space and the citadel online. Laying the groundwork for indoctrinated forces to sabotauge defenses, gather information and technology into easily aquireable assortments, and generally weaken the galaxy for them to steamroll in. Civilizations wouldn't know thousands of years in advanced, or evne hundreds of years, what was happening, until it was too late to stop. Basically laying the groundwork for a well planned out invasion, in which the hero would probably unwittingly uncover and throw a wrench into, thus making them need to plan around such an event once more, whihc would take time.

2. The reapers in this scenario, (Speed + Strategy), would rely on a incredibly well planned ambush offensive, a blitzkrieg of sorts, in which the invason and harvest is over in a matter of months, and the cleanup takes merely years. Their forces would target worlds militaries, indoctrinated sleeper cells waiting for the opprutunity to cripple their militaries and allow for the reapers to easily swoop in and take control of every planet and colony. They shut down the network and flood through the serpent nebula, sending out massive waves of reapers to secure the galaxy before any sort of resistence effort could be put up to stop them. The hero, uncovering the plans and foiling them, the reapers would be forced to rely on new tactics, which would not be as effective as their ambush/blitzkrieg strategy which allowed them to catch cycles off guard for millions of years.

3. In the last scenario the reapers would be powerful enough that they don't need to change their strategy, they would use the same tactic over and over without fail, overwhealming speed and force to crush any resistence they come accross. This would be similar to ME3, only with much less indoctrination being involved IE no cerberus turns to the darkside in the very first shot type plot. They'd pretty much be impossible to win head on, and the reapers would count on this out of arrogance and stuborness to change, seeing as how they view themselves as the pinicle of evolution. Thus a weakness would allow the hero to coordinate asymetrical warefare tactics, relying on strike teams, gurilla warfate, and various tactics and strategies unconventional to most battlefields to slowly grind the reaper war machine to screeching halt.

[Fixers0]

David7204 wrote...

This is not a military story. It never has been. And having strong military themes is unwelcome.

Thank you for your opinion.

[David7204]

1. Having the Reapers prepare everything thousands of years beforehand sounds to me like they're going to be more powerful. Not less. I'm not seeing how this makes them easier to defeat.

2. How would the galaxy knowing about the Reapers make that big of a difference if their ambush is effective another that they can conquer the galaxy in one fell swoop? In any case, this is already pretty much what happens in ME 1. The Reapers use ambush as a weapon and it's taken away from them.

3. So...aside from removing indoctrination, I don't see much of a difference here. The galaxy relies on nonconventional tactics as it is.

Modifié par David7204, 18 août 2013 - 11:27 .

[NeonFlux117]

Reorte wrote...

NeonFlux117 wrote...

It makes sense guys, its just is kinda lame and been done before in gaming and works of science fiction. Been done alot, you can call it Lazy but I call it inevitable. It had to end this way. There is no other way.

It's been done better too, but going back to the OP it's why the Reaper plot should've been dropped.

I think it's a good plot from the start- ME1 but could have been better in ME3. ME2 is a lot more personal story about death/reborn redemption and personal stories. You're fighting the collectors, who or are taking humans on the outter spaces of the galaxy. No one will help them, but Sheaprd will. But he needs help; in rides Cerberus and the Lazarus project.But a vast majority of ME2 is about the 12 squadmates that shepard comes to have and later care and love.  ME2 was so well recieved because it was much, much more personal than any of the other games. Even ME1- which was so liked because, 1 it was really cool, and 2 it was uniuqe and 3, it was about discovery. And ME2 got rid of the probalamatic inevtory systme and sharped up the shooitng mechanics- Also its bigger.

However,ME3 was a divergent from either game; it was more bro shooter epic Haloesque type of feel. And that's good and works for those type of games. But it doesn't work for a Mass Effect game. Of course, there are exceptions in ME3- Citadel DLC- which has you go back an expierence why Mass Effect 1 and 2 are so special- the characters and relationships, and also a Main story/mission that is geared around some type of origin story- this time being Shepards orgins/the council and discovery of citadel origins. And the Leviathan DLC which combines all the things that we came to love about ME1- discovery, exploration, investigating and finally discovering something new.

The DLC for Mass Effect 3 was all fan service- Omega DLC was obviously an answer and grated wish for all the people saying back int the days fo ME2, how cool it would be to have Aria as a squadmate. Omega DLC=wish granted.

From Ashes, much like Omega, was fans wishes to have a Prothean squad mate. Also, it was yet another 'origin' type of story. 

And like I said, Citadel DLC and Leviathan where all about fan service. Especially Citadel. 

it's just a shame that the DLC for Mass Effect3 3- which is, in my opinion, easily the best content of the game. Is as  almost expensive as the game itself- and this is an EA policy and practice not BioWare's choice. 

Modifié par NeonFlux117, 18 août 2013 - 11:31 .

[David7204]

That is complete nonsense. ME 3 is a not a 'bro shooter' at all. In fact, it has significantly more character interactions than ME 1.

Modifié par David7204, 18 août 2013 - 11:30 .

[JonathonPR]

There was no need to continue the Reaper plot until they were ready to flesh it out. The collectors could have worked. They did not need to be tied to a larger threat. At the end of the first Mass Effect all in game information points to the Reapers still being a possible threat but almost on a geological time scale. Could have been entertaining to have had 3 or 4 games have nothing overtly connected to the Reapers but have a few side missions that would lead to the return of the Reapers in the later games. Give the players a chance to experience more concentrated and fleshed out facets of the Mass Effect setting. That is why I am a supporter of having a separate canon for the next Mass Effect game.

[David7204]

No.

It's very clear to the player in ME 1 that the Reapers are a serious threat that aren't just going to give up or give away. Stories do not establish such threats and then abandon them.  

Yes, the in-game information points to the Reapers being a threat on a geological scale. It doesn't matter at all, because the far more important meta information contradicts and trumps it.

Modifié par David7204, 18 août 2013 - 11:34 .

[Grand Admiral Cheesecake]

Oh shove off Davey, no one wants to play with you anymore.

[NeonFlux117]

David7204 wrote...

That is complete nonsense. ME 3 is a not a 'bro shooter' at all. In fact, it has significantly more character interactions than ME 1.

oh come on man, it's a third person shooter with some RPG elements (ME1 and ME2 are both RPG's with action elements). And the character interactions you're talking about are the stuff that's not in the convo wheel. Stuff like James and Garru's mess hall scene (which is epic BTW). And the MP is all bro shooter, Gears of War esque type of horde mode. And the Multiplayer is a significant part of ME3. It was really well done, and obviously a lot of effort was put into it. I know in ME2, they wanted MP, but decide not to because there was no time and they wanted to make the SP the focal point. 

Modifié par NeonFlux117, 18 août 2013 - 11:37 .

[billy the squid]

David7204 wrote...

Darth Brotarian wrote...

Some tweaking? The rate they manage to conquer the galaxy as it is now requires they have some major re-evauluation, especially since according to the lore perviously, it took them hundreds of years to finish harvesting the galaxy, and that was with the relay network under their control.

No, It took them hundreds of years to exterminate the galaxy. It's just a long tail. Their rate of harvest is going to be logarithmic. One year defeating the galaxy. Four years defeating serious remnents. 295 years hunting down stragglers and non-so-serious remnents.

How did you work that out? Your logarithimc maths is wrong. If your logarithm base is 1 of 300, as in it took one year for the Reapers to conquer the galaxy, then your logarithm is infinity. So it took the Reapers an infinity amount of time to conquer the galaxy? In fact they're still doing it now.

Really just stop before you make a fool of yourself, it's the same kind of stupid  point you were making about economic policy being implemented to shift interest rates. Not a bloody clue. Especially when interest rates are a factor in dictating economic policy not the other way round. 

I really think you use big words without knowing what the hell you're talking about.

Modifié par billy the squid, 18 août 2013 - 11:39 .

[Confused-Shepard]

Even worse is that you can't have Mass Effect 4 set in the future without essentially having 3 vastly different state's of the galaxy unless you want to default to Destroy and say that Control/Synthesis won't get sequels.

Or you could have the Reapers be weak one-on-one rather relying purely on indoctrination and playing the species of the galaxy against one another to weaken them. In Mass Effect 3 it seems they don't even need the Citadel and can easily go and do whatever they want with hardly any resistance.

[Grand Admiral Cheesecake]

billy the squid wrote...

David7204 wrote...

Darth Brotarian wrote...

Some tweaking? The rate they manage to conquer the galaxy as it is now requires they have some major re-evauluation, especially since according to the lore perviously, it took them hundreds of years to finish harvesting the galaxy, and that was with the relay network under their control.

No, It took them hundreds of years to exterminate the galaxy. It's just a long tail. Their rate of harvest is going to be logarithmic. One year defeating the galaxy. Four years defeating serious remnents. 295 years hunting down stragglers and non-so-serious remnents.

I really think you use big words without knowing what the hell you're talking about.

That's been obvious for a while now.

[David7204]

billy the squid wrote...

How did you work that out? Your logarithimc maths is wrong. If your logarithm base is 1 of 300, as in it took one year for the Reapers to conquer the galaxy, then your logarithm is infinity. So it took the Reapers an infinity amount of time to conquer the galaxy? In fact they're still doing it now.

You need to stop confusing your little hallucinations with things I've actually said.

I never proposed an actual equation. I merely said that Reapers harvest rate would be logarithmic, in the sense that they would harvest a lot of people early on and less people as times goes by. Which is perfectly true.

Whatever equation you dreamed up is a figment of your imagination. What I used was a quick, effective example to illustrate a completely valid point.

Also, you're completely wrong. It works both ways. Interest rates affects economic policy, and economic policy affects interest rates.

Modifié par David7204, 18 août 2013 - 11:44 .

[NeonFlux117]

Confused-Shepard wrote...

Even worse is that you can't have Mass Effect 4 set in the future without essentially having 3 vastly different state's of the galaxy unless you want to default to Destroy and say that Control/Synthesis won't get sequels.

Or you could have the Reapers be weak one-on-one rather relying purely on indoctrination and playing the species of the galaxy against one another to weaken them. In Mass Effect 3 it seems they don't even need the Citadel and can easily go and do whatever they want with hardly any resistance.

And this is what BioWare is struggling with, I'm sure of that, there is no way-without making a canon ending of ME3, or others things, that there can be a Mass Effect 4 game set in the future post Shepard. That's why the next Mass Effect game will be a prequel or alternate character same time as shepard type of game. 

Modifié par NeonFlux117, 18 août 2013 - 11:43 .

[Wulfram]

billy the squid wrote...

How did you work that out? Your logarithimc maths is wrong. If your logarithm base is 1 of 300, as in it took one year for the Reapers to conquer the galaxy, then your logarithm is infinity. So it took the Reapers an infinity amount of time to conquer the galaxy? In fact they're still doing it now.

Well, they didn't exterminate the Protheans.  Javik survived, the Conduit scientists survived.  Someone will always survive, but it shouldn't matter too much so long as they destroy enough to make the survival of the civilisation unviable.