Hyrule_Gal wrote...
Ieldra2 wrote...
Abomination aesthetic functions by reinforcing the belief that nothing but destroying them is productive. It is a matter of using the right tools for a desired effect. It is clear the writers wanted people to consider alternatives, and the abomination aesthetic was counterproductive to that. With a different appearance, many people would not be quite as determined to consider nothing but destroying them.
Wasn't there a quote somewhere by a writer saying the reapers weren't supposed to have any redeeming features? That you were just supposed to want to hate them , want to kill them and not sympathise with them?
Yeah encouraging that hatred for 99% of the game was a huge blunder if we were supposed to consider "alternatives" right at the last second. What they did, what they are and even what they LOOK LIKE (as you said something devoid of humanity) is just so repulsive and evil! Bioware did a great job framing them as an enemy that needed to be destroyed at all costs. But then I'm expected to...talk to it's leader and...consider NOT killing them???? Wha? It's like control. You KILL Tim over the very issue but then were supposed to consider control moments after? Even though it was framed as the "bad guy choice" for most of the game!?
That's just another big reason why the endings were just so ridiculous to me. If you want us to consider control, DON'T make the one guy supporting it an indoctrinated wacko that shepard constantly says is WRONG. If you want us to consider the human race bonding and living in harmony with husks, cannibals and banshees...make it so the player reaction to them isn't just "KILL IT WITH FIRE!!!".
But that's what we do in war: we dehumanize our enemy. We make up non-human names for them. We draw grotesque faces of them. We do this so it is easier to kill them.
Now I can hear the complaints... if they hadn't made them into monsters and kept them as people in different uniforms instead, people would have complained this had become a 3rd person Call of Duty in space. I still think that would have been better.
That was Mac Walters who said that: "You're supposed to feel like the reapers don't have any redeeming features."
Then in the end you're given three choices, and the one that destroys the reapers wipes out all your civilization's technology sending it back to practically the start of the industrial age. Now remember your planet's resources from that era are pretty much depleted, but we're not supposed to think about that. Here is a list of what has been destroyed by the reapers:
the infrastructure is destroyed or very severely damaged
the power grid is destroyed or very severely damaged
your manufacturing base is destroyed
technology you depend on is destroyed
So realistically there's no way for it to recover: , , , what are you going to use for fuel to pump water, then there's agriculture, and food distribution, not to mention the disease. Oh the humanitarian crisis is just beginning. We're supposed to be angry and shoot that tube.
Congratulations: The galactic powers just went from first world to fourth world overnight. You have a population on Earth now of about 10 billion down from 11 billion. In another month, it'll be down to about 8 billion, and in another year around 3 or 4 billion, maybe as low as 2 billion. Don't worry, though, you've got vorcha living here now. They'll eat the remains and breed and breed and breed.
The Asari? Their colonies like Nevos and some others that surrendered outright will fare the best. The reapers spared the infrastructure.
Retour en haut
