70 réponses à ce sujet

[Andrew Lucas]

Tron Mega wrote...

JShepardN7 wrote...

The Crucible is the motive that people (not shep friends) fought with Shepard as a united galaxy, without it We probaly loses the war,imagine if the crucible was a reaper trap,in that the EMS have a big importance.

the motive could have been "help me bang liara" just as much as it could have been "help me defeat the reapers"

the replayability already sucks, if the crucible was a reaper trap all along, people would lose more then their minds. how hard would you have to try to enjoy ME3s story if the entire time the thing your trying to make help you, hurts you, and you know it the whole time.

i would assume ME4 would do exactly that to be honest with you.

honestly, id still be playing ME3 if it included conventiaonal victory. id have about 8 trilogy playthroughs done, easy. its too bad EMS means squat, and the ending is way to out of place for me to even want to watch again.

Man,Imagine  when they discover That The crucible do nothing and everyone lost Their hope and Then Shepard Start Talking in the comn that we can win this with every soldier and  fleet listening to him, this would Be so epic (Sorry for any gramar Error i am typing in the phone)
  


. 

[Kataphrut94]

I've heard that idea before (Crucible is a trap, epic speech, sudden comeback conventional victory) and it irritates me. The basic premise that the one thing everybody thought they needed turned out to be a lie and left them with no hope and no morale. Then, Shepard just gives them all a great big pep talk and suddenly everyone has the confidence they need to win the day! And the real Catalyst was...inside them all along.

Please.

[andy6915]

Kataphrut94 wrote...

I've heard that idea before (Crucible is a trap, epic speech, sudden comeback conventional victory) and it irritates me. The basic premise that the one thing everybody thought they needed turned out to be a lie and left them with no hope and no morale. Then, Shepard just gives them all a great big pep talk and suddenly everyone has the confidence they need to win the day! And the real Catalyst was...inside them all along.

Please.

Seriously. End of life as we know it, galaxy is literally controlled by Reapers by that point, everyone KNOWS it's the final battle. Everyone is already fighting with everything they have and hard as they can. They were as motivated as you can be in the final battle. You know how that ends, fighting as hard as you can with pure willpower and no Crucible? Pick refuse.

[teh DRUMPf!!]

I just remembered the explanation for this, given in ME2...

The military leadership of the time did not want to send their ships into the Terminus, for fear of inciting the merc gangs. And per TIM, the Alliance is too "stretched thin" (Council saved) or "have their hands full" (Council sacrificed) and thus can't attend to it.

However, those are lame excuses. Why is Cerberus not worried about that? It's not like the mercs would treat them differently than any perceived trespasser or rival gang. Luckily, Cerberus has a stealth ship -- problem solved. If that's all it takes, though, there's no excuse for any other legitimate organization with a military (Council, Allinace) not to get involved. Unless you want me to believe they have no stealth ships, while Cerberus has the most advanced frigate in the galaxy under their banner... in which case, LOL!

Which leads us into the next excuse: the Alliance being too stretched thin than a small black-ops organization that spent billions of credits on resurrecting Shepard and rebuilding the Normandy. Or they're not, then their priorities are just bass ackwards.

It gets worse when Hackett indicates in Arrival (if played before the Suicide Mission is launched) that the Alliance is in fact evacuating human colonies in response to the abductions. So much for not wanting to incite a war, being stretched thin or too busy.

[wolfhowwl]

The Crucible being a trap would have been awful and brought even more attention to the stupidity of pouring all of your resources into a device you don't understand.

Shepard: "I'm risking everything to build the crucible, I'm not even sure what it does." So dumb.

Modifié par wolfhowwl, 26 septembre 2013 - 05:19 .

[Tron Mega]

JShepardN7 wrote...

Tron Mega wrote...

JShepardN7 wrote...

The Crucible is the motive that people (not shep friends) fought with Shepard as a united galaxy, without it We probaly loses the war,imagine if the crucible was a reaper trap,in that the EMS have a big importance.

the motive could have been "help me bang liara" just as much as it could have been "help me defeat the reapers"

the replayability already sucks, if the crucible was a reaper trap all along, people would lose more then their minds. how hard would you have to try to enjoy ME3s story if the entire time the thing your trying to make help you, hurts you, and you know it the whole time.

i would assume ME4 would do exactly that to be honest with you.

honestly, id still be playing ME3 if it included conventiaonal victory. id have about 8 trilogy playthroughs done, easy. its too bad EMS means squat, and the ending is way to out of place for me to even want to watch again.

Man,Imagine  when they discover That The crucible do nothing and everyone lost Their hope and Then Shepard Start Talking in the comn that we can win this with every soldier and  fleet listening to him, this would Be so epic (Sorry for any gramar Error i am typing in the phone)
  


. 

yes, im not sure why bioware wanted to make the ending any more difficult then it needed to be. i dont think there would have been as severe of a back lash if bioware wasnt so convinced the reapers couldnt be defeated via united galaxy, akin to DA:O.

if the game completely cut out starbrat and the crucible and solely revolved around recruiting the galaxy(like what actualy happens in the game), then having an all out brawl with the repaers showing collected assets in action would have been all anyone would ever want. would you rather deal with what bioware is currently dealign with, or if the game featured conventional victory and fans that were unhappy that the reapers were defeated at the end of ME3? id feel much better about bioware saying "you just dont understand!" to conventional victory bachers, rather then people who objectively point out the whackiness.

i think bioware thought they needed to be more creative because theyve been creating this story since '07 and they keep seeing other things in the media they want to put into their story, that they lost themselves along the way. too much donnie darko, deus ex, and dr suess.

Modifié par Tron Mega, 26 septembre 2013 - 05:28 .

[Dean_the_Young]

StreetMagic wrote...

Dean_the_Young wrote...



ME2 was an enjoyable power trip fantasy, with everyone telling the unaccountable player projection character how amazing he/she is while saving the day, but as a trilogy bridger it was pretty pathetic in its role. It might have made a good spin-off side-game, but a game that resolved nothing and threw dozens of ideas at the wall to see what would stick for the sequel is not the basis for comparison for a trilogy ender.

I wouldn't bother comparing them too closely anyways. Only in the sense that ME3 needed EMS to be as dynamic as loyalties and resources were in ME2. ME3 is a step back.

Generally speaking, ME3 can be compared to DAO's formula much more closely, I think.. but DAO branches out towards the end rather than tightens up.

I don't think the crew interactions are better in 3 btw, because I mostly dislike the crew. Not many true Renegades either. Javik is a Renegade, but he's broody as hell. The game is already depressing enough without him. I like more lively Renegades like Jack/Grunt/Zaeed. They made war and death seem FUN. lol Suddenly ME3 is like Saving Private Ryan, and my Shep has his hands shaking like Tom Hanks. F*ck a serious commentary on war. Like I care.

Hm. I sort of agree with the sentiment, though not with the particulars of most of this. I hardly feel ME2's loyalty was dynamic or particularly meaningful (Do mission? Y/N. Persuasion check? Y/N.), and I don't think DAO's formula could be called branching in any significant way except the epilogue slides... in which case ME3 would have far more available if it chose to do it the same way. As far as narratives go, both were pretty linear, even if DAO gives the illusion of non-linearity by taking a bunch of linear quests with interchangeable outcomes in the middle.

As for the crew, what you're describing isn't the merits of the interaction as much as how much you liked the characters. Like it or not, it's hard to deny that even DLC companion Javik interacted with the other squadmates on a personal level more than almost all of ME2's cast combined.

Now, it's perfectly fine to like the ME2 companions more- I don't, and I feel the 'Renegades' of ME2 were pretty flat (except Jack, who's completely seperate from the Paragon/Renegade ideology divide). But that feeds into my wider disdain for the ME2 P/R system.

[KaiserShep]

wolfhowwl wrote...

The Crucible being a trap would have been awful and brought even more attention to the stupidity of pouring all of your resources into a device you don't understand.

Shepard: "I'm risking everything to build the crucible, I'm not even sure what it does." So dumb.

That would've been a huge practical joke on the part of the writers. I mean, how else would the story be resolved at that point?

[wolfhowwl]

HYR 2.0 wrote...

I just remembered the explanation for this, given in ME2...

The military leadership of the time did not want to send their ships into the Terminus, for fear of inciting the merc gangs. And per TIM, the Alliance is too "stretched thin" (Council saved) or "have their hands full" (Council sacrificed) and thus can't attend to it.

However, those are lame excuses. Why is Cerberus not worried about that? It's not like the mercs would treat them differently than any perceived trespasser or rival gang. Luckily, Cerberus has a stealth ship -- problem solved. If that's all it takes, though, there's no excuse for any other legitimate organization with a military (Council, Allinace) not to get involved. Unless you want me to believe they have no stealth ships, while Cerberus has the most advanced frigate in the galaxy under their banner... in which case, LOL!

Which leads us into the next excuse: the Alliance being too stretched thin than a small black-ops organization that spent billions of credits on resurrecting Shepard and rebuilding the Normandy. Or they're not, then their priorities are just bass ackwards.

It gets worse when Hackett indicates in Arrival (if played before the Suicide Mission is launched) that the Alliance is in fact evacuating human colonies in response to the abductions. So much for not wanting to incite a war, being stretched thin or too busy.

Yeah even after hitting the Council and Alliance with the "ah yes reapers" stupidity it still doesn't make sense. But Bioware wanted that darker, grittier Cerberus plot.

The reapers are coming and you need to form a united front so obviously you spend an entire game aligning yourself with a pariah terrorist organization. Great.

[DecCylonus]

HYR 2.0 wrote...

I just remembered the explanation for this, given in ME2...

The military leadership of the time did not want to send their ships into the Terminus, for fear of inciting the merc gangs. And per TIM, the Alliance is too "stretched thin" (Council saved) or "have their hands full" (Council sacrificed) and thus can't attend to it.

However, those are lame excuses. Why is Cerberus not worried about that? It's not like the mercs would treat them differently than any perceived trespasser or rival gang. Luckily, Cerberus has a stealth ship -- problem solved. If that's all it takes, though, there's no excuse for any other legitimate organization with a military (Council, Allinace) not to get involved. Unless you want me to believe they have no stealth ships, while Cerberus has the most advanced frigate in the galaxy under their banner... in which case, LOL!

Which leads us into the next excuse: the Alliance being too stretched thin than a small black-ops organization that spent billions of credits on resurrecting Shepard and rebuilding the Normandy. Or they're not, then their priorities are just bass ackwards.

It gets worse when Hackett indicates in Arrival (if played before the Suicide Mission is launched) that the Alliance is in fact evacuating human colonies in response to the abductions. So much for not wanting to incite a war, being stretched thin or too busy.

You can't compare the Alliance and Cerberus in this way. First, Cerberus is a rogue black ops organization. All of their bases and resources are hidden. If they ****** the mercs off and the mercs decide to retaliate, the mercs have to find them first. The average merc band probably doesn't have the intelligence resources to find a Cerberus base to retaliate against. Even if they do, Cerberus arguably has better technology and training. Cerberus also tends to set up in Alliance space, which means the mercs have to worry about provoking the Alliance if they come after Cerberus.

Second, Cerberus spent billions on Shepard and the SR-2 precisely to go after the Collectors in the Terminus Systems. They aren't "stretched too thin" because they directed their assets to accomplish the exact mission that the Alliance is avoiding.

[AlexMBrennan]

Without a ship, there are no more abductions. It's over. You win. Was it not silly then to rely on a laughably small force jumping into unknown territory relying on a device w/ color-coded explosions... when conventional victory was a provable solution?

Yes. Well done for noticing after just five years

[teh DRUMPf!!]

AlexMBrennan wrote...

Without a ship, there are no more abductions. It's over. You win. Was it not silly then to rely on a laughably small force jumping into unknown territory relying on a device w/ color-coded explosions... when conventional victory was a provable solution?

Yes. Well done for noticing after just five years

Better late than never. 

After ME3 and the ensuing outrage/nitpicking Olympics, I now cannot go through any story (novel, movie, video-game, whatever) without scrutinizing the hell out of it. Even though I felt it went overboard rather often, that whole event managed to rub off on me, somehow. Before, narrative issues didn't register with me unless they were particularly glaring, and if pointed-out (ala smudboy) my reaction was typically nothing more than: "alright, that was stupid, but whatever."

Not anymore. Now I'm overly critical of these things, 'can't simply sit back and enjoy ish anymore. Call it a curse.

[Dean_the_Young]

wolfhowwl wrote...

HYR 2.0 wrote...

I just remembered the explanation for this, given in ME2...

The military leadership of the time did not want to send their ships into the Terminus, for fear of inciting the merc gangs. And per TIM, the Alliance is too "stretched thin" (Council saved) or "have their hands full" (Council sacrificed) and thus can't attend to it.

However, those are lame excuses. Why is Cerberus not worried about that? It's not like the mercs would treat them differently than any perceived trespasser or rival gang. Luckily, Cerberus has a stealth ship -- problem solved. If that's all it takes, though, there's no excuse for any other legitimate organization with a military (Council, Allinace) not to get involved. Unless you want me to believe they have no stealth ships, while Cerberus has the most advanced frigate in the galaxy under their banner... in which case, LOL!

Which leads us into the next excuse: the Alliance being too stretched thin than a small black-ops organization that spent billions of credits on resurrecting Shepard and rebuilding the Normandy. Or they're not, then their priorities are just bass ackwards.

It gets worse when Hackett indicates in Arrival (if played before the Suicide Mission is launched) that the Alliance is in fact evacuating human colonies in response to the abductions. So much for not wanting to incite a war, being stretched thin or too busy.

Yeah even after hitting the Council and Alliance with the "ah yes reapers" stupidity it still doesn't make sense. But Bioware wanted that darker, grittier Cerberus plot.

The reapers are coming and you need to form a united front so obviously you spend an entire game aligning yourself with a pariah terrorist organization. Great.

And not only that, but then the game spends time explaining why Cerberus can't help you any more. It amounts to 'you bankrupted us', except they go on to fund you for all those upgrades you'll end up buying off the open markets they could have bought them from in the first place.


Don't get me wrong- there were a bunch of plausible reasons why the Alliance wouldn't be able to support you, while a rogue, small splinter group could- an ongoing war with the Geth, fears of a Council-Terminus War,  etc.

They just really didn't care about that part.

[Dean_the_Young]

KaiserShep wrote...

wolfhowwl wrote...

The Crucible being a trap would have been awful and brought even more attention to the stupidity of pouring all of your resources into a device you don't understand.

Shepard: "I'm risking everything to build the crucible, I'm not even sure what it does." So dumb.

That would've been a huge practical joke on the part of the writers. I mean, how else would the story be resolved at that point?

An actual deus ex machina?

Wit aside, I believe the Crucible-type victory device (and, given ME2's near sabotage of any conventional victory scenario, a macguffin superweapon/keystone army was about all that was left) could have worked on a limited knowledge basis... or if the obvious result were known from the start, and the drama came from the reactions to that.

On the first, I refer you to my 'How I'd have cast Cerberus' mega-TLDR thread/redesign. Basically, Cerberus steals the Crucible blueprints from Mars and only gives the Council part of the schematics. People have a rough and fuzzy idea of what the Crucible does (destoy reaper e-zero cores), but they don't know all the consequences of the design (that all ezero, everywhere in the galaxy, will be rendered inert). Imperfect knowledge is an explicit part of Cerberus's rational.



On the other hand, sometimes the idea of knowing the consequences could drive the drama. Imagine if everyone knew that the Control option would work. How stable would the galactic alliance be if everyone knew that the last person with their finger on the button would be 'it' in the game of galactic domination? Even though everyone could agree that the Crucible is better than a reaper victory, you could easily see the alliance fall apart in suspicion and paranoia and double-crossing as everyone tries to maneuver themselves into that position.

[Arcian]

David7204 wrote...

Yes, here's the thread I made about it.

For someone who complains about sh!tty ideas pretty much all of the time, you sure come up with a lot of them yourself. Perhaps your subconscious is trying to make you feel better about your own shortcomings by projecting them at everyone else here on the BSN?

[KotorEffect3]

HYR 2.0 wrote...

 
Collectors had three ships. Vega destroyed one in ME:PL. The third was destroyed during the Reaper War in ME3. And the second was destroyed by the Normandy -- one frigate, regardless whether its guns were upgraded -- in ME2.

Ok maybe I missed something somewhere but how and when was a third collector ship destroyed during the reaper war?  The only mentions of collector involvement in the reaper war is the Miracle on Palevan codex entry and even then it only mentions the collector swarms.  The only other mention is the additions to the multiplayer.

[KotorEffect3]

AlexMBrennan wrote...

Without a ship, there are no more abductions. It's over. You win. Was it not silly then to rely on a laughably small force jumping into unknown territory relying on a device w/ color-coded explosions... when conventional victory was a provable solution?

Yes. Well done for noticing after just five years

Do you always have to be a snide ass?

[Dean_the_Young]

It's not like many people noticed, or cared, in the feel-good afterglow of ME2.

Back then, trying to claim that anything was weak about the story was pretty much sacrilege. People enjoyed it, so how on earth could it have been poor writing?

[JonathonPR]

Conventional victory was possible in the setting but Bioware did not write characters capable of it. In their writing only the player character can solve problems. Nothing gets resolved without player intervention. In the Legend of Zelda that is fine because it is explicit that the problems link is solving are caused by the magic evil that can only be resolved by the chosen one. In Mass Effect no one else in a galaxy of hundreds of billions can match the Shepard or resolve a problem unless the Shepard allows it.

[Display Name Owner]

Presumably the larger issue was uncovering the Collector's connection to the Reapers and answering some questions regarding the Reapers themselves. Saving the colonies was only part of it. The Collectors were well known for possessing superior technology and suspected of carrying out obscure experiments involving genetics. The technology would have been a useful asset, and knowing that they had something to do with the Reapers would make those experiments worth learning about. Besides, they didn't know how much time they had before the Reapers arrived. Simply destroying the Collectors' fleet would have been pointless if they then left them with time to potentially rebuild and cause other problems down the line.


Anyway, wouldn't the defeat of the Collectors still fall under the category of conventional victory? It wasn't all out warfare, but it didn't use any unusual means like million year old plans for a machine that probably does something. A strike team went in, did their things, and got out. But then I know next to nothing about military anything, so I don't quite know what's classed as conventional or unconventional...