1132 réponses à ce sujet

[dreamgazer]

isnudo wrote...

For one, introducing the Reaper plot and then saying "well, it's 1000 years away, so here's something else" would have been completely unsatisfying and a bit silly.

So would engaging in persistent little skirmishes with such an imposing and tactically experienced force, one that has been exterminating/harvesting/preserving life since (essentially) the beginning of time.  The longer Shepard and Co. spend around the Reapers without getting decimated, the sillier the plot becomes. 

Hence, the Collectors, and hence why Cerberus was such a focus in ME3 (that, and their conflicting ideology over what to do with the Reapers).

[Mr.House]

dreamgazer wrote...

isnudo wrote...

For one, introducing the Reaper plot and then saying "well, it's 1000 years away, so here's something else" would have been completely unsatisfying and a bit silly.

So would engaging in persistent little skirmishes with such an imposing and tactically experienced force, one that has been exterminating/harvesting/preserving life since (essentially) the beginning of time.  The longer Shepard and Co. spend around the Reapers without getting decimated, the sillier the plot becomes. 

Hence, the Collectors, and hence why Cerberus was such a focus in ME3 (that, and their conflicting ideology over what to do with the Reapers).

But Collectors and Cerberus where horrible.

[dreamgazer]

Mr.House wrote...

dreamgazer wrote...

isnudo wrote...

For one, introducing the Reaper plot and then saying "well, it's 1000 years away, so here's something else" would have been completely unsatisfying and a bit silly.

So would engaging in persistent little skirmishes with such an imposing and tactically experienced force, one that has been exterminating/harvesting/preserving life since (essentially) the beginning of time.  The longer Shepard and Co. spend around the Reapers without getting decimated, the sillier the plot becomes. 

Hence, the Collectors, and hence why Cerberus was such a focus in ME3 (that, and their conflicting ideology over what to do with the Reapers).

But Collectors and Cerberus where horrible.

Tolerable or not, they were distractions from the greater issue. 

[Cainhurst Crow]

David7204 wrote...

Twist endings would likely just make things even worse.

The player needs to be wondering 'How the hell are we going to do this?' at the end of ME 2. That's the atmosphere and tension of a good story and a good enemy, and the only way a defeat of the Reapers would be truly satisfying in ME 3.

Not 'How is this device or technology going to save us (because we all know it will.)'

No they really don't need to be left with no strategy or plan, or have absolutely 0 new knowledge on their enemy and no clue how they are going to fight them.

You do know twist can happen in parts of the story besides the ending right? You can have parts of the plan go wrong, or parts of the strategy end up failing and lead to the players needing to think of how to overcome thd set back and ensure it works.

And anyone who thinks that having a story about working towards a goal, fighting against seemingly insurmountable odds and overcoming the all the obstacles to enact said plan, is a bad story telling method, is not someone I trust to know what a good story or good source of tension is.

[Wulfram]

I'd have just kept the Reapers operating via intermediaries and trying to open up a way to get back to the galaxy, rather than feeling the need to pull the trigger on the invasion so soon.

[Br3admax]

They should've just dropped the trilogy idea.

[Kel Riever]

Confused-Shepard wrote...

StreetMagic wrote...

Could have worked maybe (depends on execution, I guess). I do think the Reapers were a waste of a good sci-fi setting though. There's so much potential and other things to do.

Next time you create something that can wipe out a galaxy - don't make your galaxy so interesting. It's easier to say goodbye that way.

I think that is the greatest coompliment an author can recieve. Imagine when Game Of Thrones ends!
Fans: No George! Don't stop! You have so many more character's to kill and incest to write!

I asked George to stop after reading the first book, which was about 200 pages past the point I wanted him to stop.

Gonna write me a series where all the drama is killing people and placate the grimdarks (because they must haet Disney so).  Making millions just thinking about it!

Anyway, yes, MEU is original enough (code word enough) and super fun.  Probably should have kept it around, you know?

[Cainhurst Crow]

Turning the reapers into essentially the archdemons of dragon age with each cycle a blight would seeem like a very bad call to make, and I can't see much logic in tbe reapers being stopped permanently, or if they were stopped permanently, having an enemy like the collectors around.

Dealing eith the reaper problem and making them less godlike would have surved s much better purpose than scraping it all, unless they did it by retconing them out of the first game entirely. Do it right, or not at all, but don't try to sweep it under the rug and pretend it didn't happen.

[Dominus]

They should have dropped the Reaper plot.

Possibly. I'll agree that Mass Effect(outside of gameplay quarrels) was a masterpiece that had only come close in quality with the second. The reapers themselves didn't come off as plot-centric until Mass Effect 3, when it's essentially in 80% of the dialogue.

Until Virmire, the main focus had been on the ascension of Shepard as a Spectre, and the chase against Saren. In Mass Effect 2, the entire story style had changed to accomodate the "People-Aquiring" missions. In Mass Effect 3, it tried to mix the personal stories of old/new characters while trying to gain alliances via, well, doing favors. But the reaper threat was far more in your face. I don't know if dropping it mid-series would've been feasible.

It's too late to "drop" the reaper plot for the trilogy anyhow, but an educated guess would be that the reapers won't be the focus for anything new. They may be mentioned in the game, but the primary focus likely won't enter the reaper category.

Modifié par DominusVita, 18 août 2013 - 05:03 .

[SlottsMachine]

The Reapers are overrated.

[.50CalBrainSurgeon]

I must kindly disagree. The Lovecraftian aspect of the Reapers is what kept them such compelling villains. So what if Shepard's enemy is a 2km sized robot squid. It makes the conflict that much more desperate and keeps Shepard one step away from total annhilation, a great way to drive the conflict. If it was an enemy that could be defeated by conventional means, the Reapers would lose a lot of their unique characteristics as the antagonists.

[Seboist]

Darth Brotarian wrote...

Turning the reapers into essentially the archdemons of dragon age with each cycle a blight would seeem like a very bad call to make, and I can't see much logic in tbe reapers being stopped permanently, or if they were stopped permanently, having an enemy like the collectors around.

Dealing eith the reaper problem and making them less godlike would have surved s much better purpose than scraping it all, unless they did it by retconing them out of the first game entirely. Do it right, or not at all, but don't try to sweep it under the rug and pretend it didn't happen.

There were already plot elements that would have weakened them such as the citadel races being in control of the relays via the master control unit and a manual flight to the galaxy taking a toll on them(otherwise why bother with the citadel trap?) but for some reason the devs didn't utilize this.

[Mcfly616]

Meh....unlike some, I find the Reapers quite interesting. I've always looked forward to uncovering their mysteries (motives, origins etc.) Personally, I find that the Reapers move the plot forward more than anything else. One of the reasons I like ME2 least out of the trilogy. It had the least to do with the Reapers.

Modifié par Mcfly616, 18 août 2013 - 05:12 .

[Lhawke]

I loved the reaper threat. I liked that Shepard was thought a bit of a loony by the council and alliance in me2.
I just don't like the lack of intelligence that the reapers displayed in me3. Although a few characters seemed to suffer from this including Shepard.

[KaiserShep]

Darth Brotarian wrote...
And anyone who thinks that having a story about working towards a goal, fighting against seemingly insurmountable odds and overcoming the all the obstacles to enact said plan, is a bad story telling method, is not someone I trust to know what a good story or good source of tension is.

This I most certainly agree with.

[Br3admax]

"The Reapers are still out there,"

Wut?

[GreyLycanTrope]

MegaSovereign wrote...

Dropping the Reaper plot gains us nothing. We can dominate it, harnessing its essence to bring Mass Effect to the apex of storytelling.

You're just saying that cause you'd be out of the job otherwise.

[dreamgazer]

KaiserShep wrote...

Darth Brotarian wrote...
And anyone who thinks that having a story about working towards a goal, fighting against seemingly insurmountable odds and overcoming the all the obstacles to enact said plan, is a bad story telling method, is not someone I trust to know what a good story or good source of tension is.

This I most certainly agree with.

Meh.  

Seemingly insurmountable =/= Observably near-invincible, when you start thinking about the scope of their forces and how long they've been harvesting. 

Modifié par dreamgazer, 18 août 2013 - 05:48 .

[KaiserShep]

Eh, details. But I think the basic point still stands.

[dreamgazer]

KaiserShep wrote...

Eh, details. But I think the basic point still stands.

I agree with the basic point of conventionally besting the odds as a powerful narrative tool, but not when the odds are that skewed.

[Br3admax]

See Darkspawn, Sith Empire, Sauron, etc. None of these would have been beaten if we just had a conventional war. That's not the problem at all.