447 réponses à ce sujet

[Iakus]

Mcfly616 wrote...


As I said, they already had a military branch. Who says anything was magically created? Nothing in the trilogy contradicts the existence of Cerberus ships.

And in terms of money, if you're as well funded as that particular system, you most certainly can.

Except according to EDI, Cerberus just had a dozen cells, and a couple hundred agents, tops.

Warships are big and expensive.  They take a lot of time to build and to train crews, and that' with the backing of planetary governments and not reverse-engineering Reaper technology.

And they got all this in less than a year

I don't see why it warrants an explaination. Multiple logical explainations are possible with the information provided. I just gave one of them. Speculation isn't the problem in this instance. Whether people prefer to speculate or not, is another matter entirely.

Speculation is the problem because that's all we have.  The entire coup attempt culminated in his attempt to kill the Council, and we have no freaking motive!

But hey, nobody liked him, and we get to kill him, so it doesn't matter!  Think up your own reason why he went batpoop!

Some would say it was Shepard's destiny to break the cycle. Much the same way Neo was destined to break the cycle (hence "the One"), or the way Anakin was destined to bring balance to the Force ("The Chosen One"). It also seems the Master Chief is on the same type of path in the Halo saga, but it's still a bit early to tell.

Shepard was never "The One", "the Chosen One" or any other such nonsense.  Shepard has evolved (or devolved) like John Maclaine in the Die Hard movies:  from a cop in the wrong place at the wrong time to some kind of psuedo superhero.

What does that same scene mean when you see it at the end of a movie? (Countless movies, in fact)

For the protagonist, that scene simply does not happen.  The character is typically shown climbing out of rubble, or waking up surrounded by surviving allies, or striding purposefully away from the scene of battle.

Such breath scenes asre typically reserved for the monsters the hero fights.  And used as sequel bait.  But the problem here is

1) Shepard is not (supposedly) the monster
2) There will be no sequel, rendering such a scene pointless anyway
3) EC was supposed to provide "clarity and closure" anyway.

Not really. When you experience any medium and/or genre of fiction, you should keep your real world logic in check. If a narrative defies the logic of the fictional universe it's set in, that's a separate matter.

ME3 turned even Mass Effect's already mushy soft-scifi logic into a complete joke where the writer simply declares something be because it is written thus.

[sveners]

Mcfly616 wrote...


What the whole trilogy was about is subjective. And it probably doesn't boil down to one individual theme.

Some would say it was Shepard's destiny to break the cycle. Much the same way Neo was destined to break the cycle (hence "the One"), or the way Anakin was destined to bring balance to the Force ("The Chosen One"). It also seems the Master Chief is on the same type of path in the Halo saga, but it's still a bit early to tell.

Faceless torso drawing a breath =/= clarity or closure.

What does that same scene mean when you see it at the end of a movie? (Countless movies, in fact)

While we will see, I doubt Master Chief will suffer the same fate as Shepard. Even though it would make more sense since he is a set character.

And seriously, please mention some of the films that have ended like ME3's Destroy ending. Ambivalency is not closure.

Countless? ... .guess I don't watch many films

[Iakus]

AlanC9 wrote...

iakus wrote...

AlanC9 wrote...

iakus wrote...

And if they do that, they've learned nothing.

Because whatever Mac Walters claims, film and games are not the same thing.

What's the difference?

Passive viewer vs active participant

Sure. What does that mean a film can do but a game shouldn't? I can't think of anything offhand.

Players get more invested in their characters, especially when a game goes out of its way to make their choices matter. Games require far more time and investment than any movie.  Or even a movie triogy.   As such, in a game, they must be much more careful in determining
 
a) the ultimate fate of the character as a result of said choices (no, faceless torsos are not acceptable, I don't care how "obvious" it was to you)

Letting the player see a return on their investment.  The player needs to know what kind of game they are getting.  I'm pretty sure you'd be p*ssed if you found out hours later that a game you've been playing was stacked against you.  If the DM was fudging dice simply to steer the story the way he wanted it to go. 

You might call it the Illusion of Choice.  players don't expect what they want to matter in film or tv or books.  They have no say in Frodo's fate.  But if they play a game where they invest dozens of hours of time in a reactive game where they play the Ringbearer, they will feel a sense of ownership of that character.  And even in the story itself.

This is why Mac Walters comparing Mass Effect to breaking Bad was wall-bangingly stupid. 

His Shepard =/= My Shepard. 

[Mcfly616]

sveners wrote...

Mcfly616 wrote...


What the whole trilogy was about is subjective. And it probably doesn't boil down to one individual theme.

Some would say it was Shepard's destiny to break the cycle. Much the same way Neo was destined to break the cycle (hence "the One"), or the way Anakin was destined to bring balance to the Force ("The Chosen One"). It also seems the Master Chief is on the same type of path in the Halo saga, but it's still a bit early to tell.

Faceless torso drawing a breath =/= clarity or closure.

What does that same scene mean when you see it at the end of a movie? (Countless movies, in fact)

While we will see, I doubt Master Chief will suffer the same fate as Shepard. Even though it would make more sense since he is a set character.

And seriously, please mention some of the films that have ended like ME3's Destroy ending. Ambivalency is not closure.

Countless? ... .guess I don't watch many films

not sure why you quoted the "faceless torso"bit. I never said Chief would suffer that fate. I implied that he might be on a similar path. Breaking a cycle of events that has been ongoing as far as anybody can remember.

"Countless"....obviously there's a finite number. However, there's also to many occurrences to count. For now, check out Flash Gordon. (Yes, cheesy 80's B-list action movie. However, the same type of scene ends the film)

[sveners]

Mcfly616 wrote...

sveners wrote...

Mcfly616 wrote...


What the whole trilogy was about is subjective. And it probably doesn't boil down to one individual theme.

Some would say it was Shepard's destiny to break the cycle. Much the same way Neo was destined to break the cycle (hence "the One"), or the way Anakin was destined to bring balance to the Force ("The Chosen One"). It also seems the Master Chief is on the same type of path in the Halo saga, but it's still a bit early to tell.

Faceless torso drawing a breath =/= clarity or closure.

What does that same scene mean when you see it at the end of a movie? (Countless movies, in fact)

While we will see, I doubt Master Chief will suffer the same fate as Shepard. Even though it would make more sense since he is a set character.

And seriously, please mention some of the films that have ended like ME3's Destroy ending. Ambivalency is not closure.

Countless? ... .guess I don't watch many films

not sure why you quoted the "faceless torso"bit. I never said Chief would suffer that fate. I implied that he might be on a similar path. Breaking a cycle of events that has been ongoing as far as anybody can remember.

"Countless"....obviously there's a finite number. However, there's also to many occurrences to count. For now, check out Flash Gordon. (Yes, cheesy 80's B-list action movie. However, the same type of scene ends the film)

Mixup with the quote, it was meant for the second point.

I should have specified. Which movies end with the protagonist in a similar situation. Seeing as it's not Flash picking up the ring at the end.

Modifié par sveners, 04 novembre 2013 - 07:07 .

[Mcfly616]

Triple post .....wtf

Modifié par Mcfly616, 04 novembre 2013 - 07:26 .

[Eryri]

sveners wrote...

I should have specified. Which movies end with the protagonist in a similar situation. Seeing as it's not Flash picking up the ring at the end.

The only example I can think of that comes close is Xavier waking up in his brother's body at the end of X-men 3...

Ironically enough; also a poorly received third installment of a sci-fi franchise.

[Mcfly616]

Dbl post

Modifié par Mcfly616, 04 novembre 2013 - 07:25 .

[Mcfly616]

iakus wrote...

Except according to EDI, Cerberus just had a dozen cells, and a couple hundred agents, tops.

Warships are big and expensive.  They take a lot of time to build and to train crews, and that' with the backing of planetary governments and not reverse-engineering Reaper technology.

And they got all this in less than a year

Hmm yeah, somehow I don't see how a dozen cells and the number of "agents" really proves the absence of ships. In fact, it doesn't.

Speculation is the problem because that's all we have.  The entire coup attempt culminated in his attempt to kill the Council, and we have no freaking motive!

I already stated a clear, obvious, and logical motive behind his actions. You just don't accept it. I wonder if a soldier or federal agent freaks out because he had to gun down an armed man that was putting lives in immediate danger, and never learns the reason the guy went nuts. Hmm I'm guessing they see it as part of the job, and maybe try to look at the evidence and the actions leading up to the incident in order to discover a motive.

Like it or not, people come and go in their own ways, and half the time we never have any idea as to what they were thinking. Happens every single day.

Shepard was never "The One", "the Chosen One" or any other such nonsense.  Shepard has evolved (or devolved) like John Maclaine in the Die Hard movies:  from a cop in the wrong place at the wrong time to some kind of psuedo superhero.

I never said he was called either of those things. But many people in the MEU treated him as such. Regardless of whether you like it or not, he did exactly the same thing. Same concept. Same trope. He broke the cycle.

For the protagonist, that scene simply does not happen.  The character is typically shown climbing out of rubble, or waking up surrounded by surviving allies, or striding purposefully away from the scene of battle.

Such breath scenes asre typically reserved for the monsters the hero fights.  And used as sequel bait.  But the problem here is

Completely false. It does happen. Not to mention you just used a bunch of generalizations and stereotypes to support your argument (monsters, sequels, such a scene is pointless). Fail. .


All you're doing is handwaving every point I make, and putting forth your own perspective/opinion without any foundation of truth backing it.

Modifié par Mcfly616, 04 novembre 2013 - 07:29 .

[Iakus]

Mcfly616 wrote...

Hmm yeah, somehow I don't see how a dozen cells and the number of "agents" really proves the absence of ships. In fact, it doesn't.

Who is building them?  Who is training the crew?  Who is installing the Reaper upgrades?

I already stated a clear, obvious, and logical motive behind his actions. You just don't accept it. I wonder if a soldier or federal agent freaks out because he had to gun down an armed man that was putting lives in immediate danger, and never learns the reason the guy went nuts. Hmm I'm guessing they see it as part of the job.

Like it or not, people come and go in their own ways, and half the time we never have any idea as to what they were thinking. Happens every single day. 

And you're accusing me of handwaving? 

For the protagonist, that scene simply does not happen.  The character is typically shown climbing out of rubble, or waking up surrounded by surviving allies, or striding purposefully away from the scene of battle.

Such breath scenes asre typically reserved for the monsters the hero fights.  And used as sequel bait.  But the problem here is

Completely false. It does happen. Not to mention you just used a bunch of generalizations and stereotypes to support your argument (monsters, sequels, such a scene is pointless). Fail. .

 

Give me examples then.  You said there were "countless" so it should be really easy to rattle off a few.

Remember, no monsters.  And no one who wears masks made of human flesh either.

Modifié par iakus, 04 novembre 2013 - 07:30 .

[Mcfly616]

Eryri wrote...

sveners wrote...

I should have specified. Which movies end with the protagonist in a similar situation. Seeing as it's not Flash picking up the ring at the end.

The only example I can think of that comes close is Xavier waking up in his brother's body at the end of X-men 3...

Ironically enough; also a poorly received third installment of a sci-fi franchise.

please, don't throw an X-Men film into the same lot as Sci Fi lol


Anyways, check out The Grey.

[sH0tgUn jUliA]

Ah yes, the troll of the armless, legless, and headless torso with the N7 tags that takes a gasp to give us a "glimmer of hope."

glimmer - a faint manifestation of...

no wonder people did a game mod to change the ending.

[JamesFaith]

iakus wrote...

Mcfly616 wrote...

Hmm yeah, somehow I don't see how a dozen cells and the number of "agents" really proves the absence of ships. In fact, it doesn't.

Who is building them?  Who is training the crew?  Who is installing the Reaper upgrades?

Carl Hislop Aerospace and other Cerberus owned companies who already secretly built Normandy 2 with ultra expensive Tantalus core?

There would be enough freelancers in universe with common interstellar travel, especially when one of major source of Cerberus people is racist and extremist from Alliance military.

Retrained technicians. Science is make it work, serial instalation is not so difficult.

[Urdnot Amenark]

Bfler wrote...

69_Gio_69 wrote...

Also, where is the 'bad ending'. This is one of the reasons I don't trust the endings to be real. Every ending you choose it is all good and well. I know choice is important, but I can't believe that Bioware wouldn't include a 'bad choice' so to speak. In the end, the reapers can't win. And in a way you always succeed. 

Except of in Destroy, the Reapers win more or less in every ending.

That's not true. In Control, Shep becomes a Demigod and takes control of the Reaper Collective, effectively replacing the Catalyst and ends the war then. If ze is Renegade then there might be some possible issues, but aside from that, the Reapers effectively lose. Ignoring Synthesis' space magic, the Reapers also lose there since humanity reaches a singularity that renders their whole cycle of harvesting null and void. The only real ending where people lose is in Reject.

[Mcfly616]

iakus wrote...

Who is building them?  Who is training the crew?  Who is installing the Reaper upgrades?

Whoever Cerberus hired to do it. Not to mention I believe they own quite a few corporations that can provide the services they need. Presumably they could've done it in-house. After all, is every Cerberus employee considered an "Agent"? Doubt it. So, the number of Agents doesn't necessarily represent the entire Cerberus workforce.

And you're accusing me of handwaving? 

Yes, I did. You're stating your own opinions, while I just stated a fact of everyday life as an officer of the law or a soldier. Crazy people pull guns out and kill people, do you expect the officer or soldier to ask him what his motive is and get a detailed explaination before shooting him? OR, does the officer shoot first in order to save those in danger, and then proceed to piece together the evidence in order to find a plausible motive? I'm guessing the latter happens nearly everytime.

Give me examples then.  You said there were "countless" so it should be really easy to rattle off a few.

Remember, no monsters.  And no one who wears masks made of human flesh either.

The point of the scene is to signify the characters survival. That's the point I was making. So since you acknowledge the scene has been done before (whether it was the monster, bad guy, good guy is irrelevant), you also acknowledge your awareness of the significance of the scene. You know it means he's alive.

Now that we got that out of the way:

"The Grey" and "Drive"
(No rubble or anything.....but the Protagonist is believed dead....at first)

Anyways, I'll be back in a few hours to carry on this discussion and/or comment on any replies. I have some business to attend to.

Modifié par Mcfly616, 04 novembre 2013 - 08:10 .

[SwobyJ]

Obadiah wrote...

Mcfly616 wrote...
...
Who's the kid? Did you play the first 10 minutes of the game?


The dreams can be attributed to PTSD, or from a fictional standpoint it can be seen as a hero having hauntings of his pasast as he hurtles ever closer to his destiny.
...

I always rather liked the idea that Sheapard in ME3 was in some kind of indoctrination/contact with the Catalyst.

It sort of plays into my theory that indoctrination as a form of mind control is actually the organic mind being brought into the Reaper collective. First the mind experiences sensations of other members of the collective (ME2 scientists on the derelect Reaper), and then accepts the same motivations and goals(Saren), and eventually is overwhlemed to the point of uselessness.

Perhaps not at first, but dreams being as nebulous as they are, that image of Shep and the kid burning in the final dream is aweful close to the Catalyst's explanation of "cleansing fire."

Also, I liked the idea that Harbinger is interested in Shep as the perceived danger because the Reapers cannot seem to overwhelm his mind as they can others. At least not yet.

And I still believe it... ("GET OUT SWOBY!!")

ME1 - Sovereign is the Intelligence and shifts interest to Shepard.
ME2 - Overwhelmed by more direct Reaper indoc, everything is at least slightly off the reality, but Harbinger finds himself frustratingly unable to breach Shepard
ME3 - Well... I have a (complicated) view of this that is that Shepard is essentially indocing himself and the Reapers by this point, leading to the sliver of a victory in every choice we make in the Crucible , but High Breath Destroy is "most directly victorious in immediate events".
Because lets face it - everyone wants to either be Shepard's friend or stay out of his way. I like the thought that it eventually even happens to the Reapers.

[SwobyJ]

ElSuperGecko wrote...

Obadiah wrote...
Also, I liked the idea that Harbinger is interested in Shep as the perceived danger because the Reapers cannot seem to overwhelm his mind as they can others. At least not yet...

I always saw Harbinger's interest in Shepard as not as a threat, but as a potential ally.  Hence the attempt to build the Human Reaper in ME2.  All it required was the right mind controlling it...

(Oh, look at all the human bodies being gathered around the Citadel Beam in Me3.  And what's happening on the Citadel itself.  "Reminds me of your description of the Collector base!", says Anderson...)

Yet we see no Human Reaper??? :ph34r:

[Urdnot Amenark]

SwobyJ wrote...

ElSuperGecko wrote...

Obadiah wrote...
Also, I liked the idea that Harbinger is interested in Shep as the perceived danger because the Reapers cannot seem to overwhelm his mind as they can others. At least not yet...

I always saw Harbinger's interest in Shepard as not as a threat, but as a potential ally.  Hence the attempt to build the Human Reaper in ME2.  All it required was the right mind controlling it...

(Oh, look at all the human bodies being gathered around the Citadel Beam in Me3.  And what's happening on the Citadel itself.  "Reminds me of your description of the Collector base!", says Anderson...)

Yet we see no Human Reaper??? :ph34r:

And then there was TIM. That's as close to a human reaper as we'll ever get aside from that leftover Terminator reject in ME2.

[Obadiah]

SwobyJ wrote...

ElSuperGecko wrote...

Obadiah wrote...
Also, I liked the idea that Harbinger is interested in Shep as the perceived danger because the Reapers cannot seem to overwhelm his mind as they can others. At least not yet...

I always saw Harbinger's interest in Shepard as not as a threat, but as a potential ally.  Hence the attempt to build the Human Reaper in ME2.  All it required was the right mind controlling it...

(Oh, look at all the human bodies being gathered around the Citadel Beam in Me3.  And what's happening on the Citadel itself.  "Reminds me of your description of the Collector base!", says Anderson...)

Yet we see no Human Reaper??? :ph34r:

Wouldn't it be cool if it turned out that only Shepard heard all those Harbinger trolls in ME2?

Dun dun DUNNN!!! 

Modifié par Obadiah, 04 novembre 2013 - 08:26 .

[SwobyJ]

Obadiah wrote...

SwobyJ wrote...

ElSuperGecko wrote...

Obadiah wrote...
Also, I liked the idea that Harbinger is interested in Shep as the perceived danger because the Reapers cannot seem to overwhelm his mind as they can others. At least not yet...

I always saw Harbinger's interest in Shepard as not as a threat, but as a potential ally.  Hence the attempt to build the Human Reaper in ME2.  All it required was the right mind controlling it...

(Oh, look at all the human bodies being gathered around the Citadel Beam in Me3.  And what's happening on the Citadel itself.  "Reminds me of your description of the Collector base!", says Anderson...)

Yet we see no Human Reaper??? :ph34r:

Wouldn't it be cool if it turned out that only Shepard heard all those Harbinger trolls in ME2?

Dun dun DUNNN!!! 

That was already my interpretation. We're meant to assume he's talking more in the 'broad scope for humanity' to the squad, when he's actually speaking directly to Shepard, about Shepard, and Shepard just pushes through it.

[Vargeisa]

Ah yes, Cerberus, a highly secretive organization. Members of one cell cannot identify members of another.
Yet they have a logo/icon.
Which they put on everything. Buildings, vehicles, ships, armor of their agents.

If only all terrorists where that smart...

Modifié par TimtheEnchanter, 04 novembre 2013 - 08:46 .

[SwobyJ]

Urdnot Amenark wrote...

SwobyJ wrote...

ElSuperGecko wrote...

Obadiah wrote...
Also, I liked the idea that Harbinger is interested in Shep as the perceived danger because the Reapers cannot seem to overwhelm his mind as they can others. At least not yet...

I always saw Harbinger's interest in Shepard as not as a threat, but as a potential ally.  Hence the attempt to build the Human Reaper in ME2.  All it required was the right mind controlling it...

(Oh, look at all the human bodies being gathered around the Citadel Beam in Me3.  And what's happening on the Citadel itself.  "Reminds me of your description of the Collector base!", says Anderson...)

Yet we see no Human Reaper??? :ph34r:

And then there was TIM. That's as close to a human reaper as we'll ever get aside from that leftover Terminator reject in ME2.

*shoots the Destroy tube*