150 réponses à ce sujet

[GreyLycanTrope]

Deathsaurer wrote...
Any not blatantly stupid race would stop and say you know maybe this isn't such a good idea after a star
gets screwed up. Granted we've met a couple too dumb to live races but I'd rather not have laughably incompetent villains.

I don't have a problem with them doing something with it in the future but it can't be connected to the Reapers because derpyness ensues.

You're assuming I'm suggesting that stars getting screwed up would be the standard, which isn't what I'm suggesting at all. Again think of Heastrom as one experiment, one failed cast off project, not a wide spread method they're employing just something they tried that failed and don't plan on using again.

[sH0tgUn jUliA]

Legion of 1337 wrote...

Ok now I must know:

For everyone who said "no" and never elaborated, why is a Gainax Ending (unexplainable and confusing nonsense - what we got) preferable to a Lovecraft Ending (unexplainable and confusing nonsense on purpose for a reason)?

Neither one is preferable. They're both nonsense. It didn't matter. I said I didn't need to know any reason for their existence. The ending was still going to be confusing nonsense anyway.

Why is dark energy lovecraftian? A human reaper processing dark energy to save the galaxy is still horse**** and if you destroy them it makes you the villain in the end and makes them the good guys. 

It is no different than what we got. They're harvesting us so we don't create another type of synthetic like them. They're the good guys. If we destroy them we'll create synthetics again and there's nothing to stop us from creating one that'll destroy all organic life in the galaxy. And we kill our allies and commit genocide, or we create a dystopia, or a whatever. We become the villain. 

Take your pick. Both endings are the same version of this: 

[Deathsaurer]

Greylycantrope wrote...

You're assuming I'm suggesting
that stars getting screwed up would be the standard, which isn't what
I'm suggesting at all. Again think of Heastrom as one experiment, one
failed cast off project, not a wide spread method they're employing just
something they tried that failed and don't plan on using again.

No I'm actually not. Once you do screw a star up you really need to rethink what you're doing. You can't know if your next experiment will have similar results or worse.

Modifié par Deathsaurer, 11 novembre 2013 - 05:51 .

[maaaad365]

Deathsaurer wrote...

maaaad365 wrote...

The only plot hole that I see in my scenario is that you don't defeat them right away. The war can go for hudreds of years, but they eventually have to surrender.

Not really... The real problem with trying to come up with a conventional way to beat them is they know how to build better WMD but thus far have chosen not to. Pushed into a corner do you think that would hold true? Imagine them setting the relay network to overload Arrival style in retribution.

If they do that then they are stuck like all of the other space ships. The details of the war don't have to come in the game. It could say : 10 years later... and you see Shepard signing a peace treaty with them or you see him destroying the last pack of Reapers.
It's much more plausible than energy passing through solid matter and combining DNA with cybernetics.

[SwobyJ]

Linkenski wrote...

Not to go off-topic, but I found an interview from 2009 with Mac Walters where he says they were "trying to delve into themes about the relationship between organics and synthetics" in ME2, and I was like... was that theme ever present in that game?

Makes me wonder if it really WAS the longtime goal for the MEU storyline.

Things that involve organics and synthetics, specifically and overtly.

ME1:
-Quarian story itself
-Rogue AI sidemission
-Citadel AI sidemission
-Reaper story itself (just with us being organics and them being overlord machines)
-Saren declaring an 'alliance', 'weakness of neither', etc...

ME2:
-Collector story (declared as a merging of tech implants, genetic engineering, organic evolution)
-Tali's Loyalty Mission
-Legion's Loyalty Mission
-Overlord (DLC)

Conclusion: I believe that this theme would be present in the series, Mac or no Mac. And it would be core to the narrative. However, it might not have been at the VERY FOREFRONT of the ME3 ending.

Also, while 'organics vs synthetics' wasn't super involved with everything in ME1-2, imo there was a ton of lines throughout, that involved it. Or even just the ethics involved with it.


I think, maybe, the issue with this part of ME3's ending was the framing of 'organics vs synthetics' specifically, and only that. Instead make it more about 'chaos' and 'order'.

But then they'd be accused of stealing from Babylon 5... soo...

[Dr. Megaverse]

Legion of 1337 wrote...

So I've been lurking around here sometimes but haven't posted barely at all for a while. If this is old news forgive me but it occurred to me recently.

I used to harp on Drew Karpshin's original idea of the Reapers being some kind of space Cthulu trying to stop Dark Energy from causing the heat death of the universe or whatever. But the more I think about it, the more I think "You know what, that works." In ME1 the Reapers themselves stated their very existence and nature was beyond the comprehension of organic minds. Making them into space Cthulu, using unseen, imcomprehensible methods to supposedly fight the laws of physics seems impossible to us and I guarantee everyone would have criticized it as stupid if they used that ending, but it makes sense if you think of it in a Lovecraftian sense. And the Reapers always were a bit Lovecraftian, at least until ME3 where they turned out to just be a bunch of brainwashed drones for a mis-programmed AI. Way to kill the suspense guys.

Personnally I'm a fan of Lovecraft so I wouldn't mind a kind of dillema at the end where if you act on your ignorant, organic impulse and destroy the Reapers, you may doom the entire universe at some point far beyond your lifetime; but if you submit to the Reapers' motives, they kill you and everyone else for the sake of saving existence. It's a good dilemma, even if most people would just pick the "good" ending anyway.

It does sound like it'd make for a great Lovecraft story, if he'd wrote in the sci-fi genre too (I wish!). 

[SwobyJ]

Deathsaurer wrote...

Yeah making that stuff optional was... a mistake. I'd never say it's the main theme, I'd never say there is a main theme. It's there subtly in your face the entire time but you actually have to go looking to explore it in any depth. Otherwise it's just background noise.

Well that's an interesting point.

Imagine playing ME1 + ME2 + ME3 like this:
-Only main and mandatory missions to continue the story
-Barely any reading of text, but only the cutscenes
-Barely Investigating anything with NPCs
-NO DLC
-No side books, movies, comics

What do you have? Well, you have a flat-out spacey war story. No theories, no understanding. Purely just a B-grade (at best) show of space marine vs. giant robots. Hell, ME3's Action mode even ASSISTS in putting people into that place.

And it works.

Until..

BOOM. Reaper Starchild on the weird visit to the Citadel (lol WTF?

I'm not saying people who do everything, read everything, etc, will 'get' the ending. Or especially if they'll LIKE it, even if they do 'get' it.
But I AM saying they have a better chance, and that may be by deliberate design by the developers.

You can take or leave that. Certainly the devs must have known that leaving a trilogy, even if it's not actually the end of the series/franchise, as a mystery, isn't going to make them many friends.

In fact, they did know that.

http://news.softpedi...rs-250798.shtml

Mike Gamble, an associate producer working on Mass Effect 3,
told Gamerzines that, “We want the outcomes to be satisfying to the
player. That doesn’t necessarily mean they’re all going to be happy or
positive. It’s going to make some people extremely happy. It’s going to
make some people angry.”



He added, “But that’s part of it, right? To invoke the emotion putting
some of these stories to bed will naturally bring up. I honestly think
the player base is going to be really happy with the way we’ve done it.
You had a part in it. Every decision you’ve made will impact how things
go. The player’s also the architect of what happens.”

Modifié par SwobyJ, 11 novembre 2013 - 06:12 .

[spinachdiaper]

Honestly I think Drew's ending at worst would of been Three Mile Island bad compared to the ME3 ending which is Chernobyl bad

[maaaad365]

spinachdiaper wrote...

Honestly I think Drew's ending at worst would of been Three Mile Island bad compared to the ME3 ending which is Chernobyl bad

+++

[SwobyJ]

spinachdiaper wrote...

Honestly I think Drew's ending at worst would of been Three Mile Island bad compared to the ME3 ending which is Chernobyl bad

Even though I have some...unique opinions about the trilogy's story and the ending itself, in terms of, specifically, 'satisfaction' of endings, I'd say:

ME1 - 9/10 (OMG COOL! I'm a fan. Pew pew! Take that Sovereign!)
ME2 - 8.5/10 (I'M SO EXCITED! But that final boss was weird and ME1 choices didn't seem to do a lot.)
ME3 - 5/10 (Well.... we all know what happened here. Huge rageeeee.)
ME3:EC - 6.5/10 (Turned a terrible ending into a barely satisfactory one overall)
What Drew might have made, at best (my guess) - 7/10

Honestly I don't see how Dark Energy and how we have to stop it, would have been all the compelling in itself. It would need a lot of good storytelling to surround it, and we don't know how or if that'd happen or not.

Modifié par SwobyJ, 11 novembre 2013 - 06:17 .

[Argentoid]

SwobyJ wrote...

ME2 - 8.5/10 

Modifié par Argentoid, 11 novembre 2013 - 06:20 .

[SwobyJ]

Deathsaurer wrote...

SwobyJ wrote...

If anything, I'd like Dark Energy to play a part in a future game. Just to... not leave things hanging.

Just... make it something that started poping up recently, like in the past few hundred years, so the Reapers have no connection to it.

Leviathans poop Eezo and it's connected to Dying Stars.

Discuss.

[SwobyJ]

Argentoid wrote...

SwobyJ wrote...

ME2 - 8.5/10 

What?

I'm not talking about YOUR reaction. Or MINE. (mine is 7/10, and I was less impressed than with ME1's)

I'm talking about my perception of the 'general gaming public + fan response'. And by 'fan', I don't mean us BSNers who are a fraction of a fraction.

[iOnlySignIn]

Heat death of the universe/dark energy are real, as in already proven to be real by 2013 Earth scientists.

The *inevitability* of the conflict between organics and synthetics is f*cking bullsh!t. Not just in the ME universe, but in every universe. It makes as much sense as forcing everyone to starve themselves to death because eating *inevitably* leads to death by choking.

Modifié par iOnlySignIn, 11 novembre 2013 - 06:34 .

[SwobyJ]

sH0tgUn jUliA wrote...

Legion of 1337 wrote...

Ok now I must know:

For everyone who said "no" and never elaborated, why is a Gainax Ending (unexplainable and confusing nonsense - what we got) preferable to a Lovecraft Ending (unexplainable and confusing nonsense on purpose for a reason)?

Neither one is preferable. They're both nonsense. It didn't matter. I said I didn't need to know any reason for their existence. The ending was still going to be confusing nonsense anyway.

Why is dark energy lovecraftian? A human reaper processing dark energy to save the galaxy is still horse**** and if you destroy them it makes you the villain in the end and makes them the good guys. 

It is no different than what we got. They're harvesting us so we don't create another type of synthetic like them. They're the good guys. If we destroy them we'll create synthetics again and there's nothing to stop us from creating one that'll destroy all organic life in the galaxy. And we kill our allies and commit genocide, or we create a dystopia, or a whatever. We become the villain. 

Take your pick. Both endings are the same version of this:

Well, it's not like Mass Effect is over. Just as ME1 ends the Sovereign threat but the Reapers are out there, and ME2 ends the Collector threat but Reapers are now definitely coming, ME3 may have ended the 'Reaper Threat' but the motivations behind them are going to be what's more important than Reapers themselves.

Wait no, the endings are real. Nevermind.

I got nothing.

[Argentoid]

SwobyJ wrote...

Argentoid wrote...

SwobyJ wrote...

ME2 - 8.5/10 

What?

I'm not talking about YOUR reaction. Or MINE. (mine is 7/10, and I was less impressed than with ME1's)

I'm talking about my perception of the 'general gaming public + fan response'. And by 'fan', I don't mean us BSNers who are a fraction of a fraction.

Heh, I was just kidding. I'm bored.

BTW, fan perception for ME2 is 10/10.

Modifié par Argentoid, 11 novembre 2013 - 06:35 .

[SwobyJ]

Argentoid wrote...

SwobyJ wrote...

Argentoid wrote...

SwobyJ wrote...

ME2 - 8.5/10 

What?

I'm not talking about YOUR reaction. Or MINE. (mine is 7/10, and I was less impressed than with ME1's)

I'm talking about my perception of the 'general gaming public + fan response'. And by 'fan', I don't mean us BSNers who are a fraction of a fraction.

Heh, I was just kidding. I'm bored.

BTW, fan perception for ME2 is 10/10.

I'd say gaming press 'perception' is 10/10

Outside of that, it's more broadly 9/10 at best, which is still very high. I'm factoring in how gamers overall treat the game, only in addition to fans. A lot of people tried ME2 and disliked a lot of parts of how it ended - they're just insignificant compared to the deluge of support. But in the press, it was almost universal 10/10.

Anyway, I'm sorry for OT. Done nao.

[sH0tgUn jUliA]

Dark energy/heat death of the universe is real as of 2013. It was going faster in the galaxy because of the mass relays and biotics and eezo and all that stuff. But what was one 2 km long human reaper going to do to stop it? ROTFLMAO. I say we blow up the reapers and party like it's 2199. Uh, not so fast. Doing so will destroy the mass relays and kill all biotics.

Half of BSN: "Oh good, Liara is gone. OMG NOES MIRANDA!!!!"

See this is what Mac probably thought about, and said look, this is BS. No one's going to buy this.

[dgcatanisiri]

Honestly, I think not, no. You can 'yo dawg' the hell out of organics versus synthetics, but the whole dark energy concept makes no sense. "We're going to preserve the galaxy from being destroyed by dark energy by leaving these relays that run on dark energy behind to get all species who evolve to spacefaring status to base all of their technology around dark energy and find a way to stop dark energy!" That's worse. At least in my book.

At least organics versus synthetics has a starting point in game, with the geth and quarians. It's still no where near built up to enough to justify being the grand finale to the trilogy, but there is some foundation, shoddy as it is. Personally, I'm of the belief that the grand theme of the trilogy was 'self-determination versus predestination,' with the cycles being the ultimate representation of this - give in to 'the inevitable' or break away entirely. So I wish that the endings had been a better fit to that. I didn't need the origins of the Reapers, just a way to destroy them (with a separate choice that would affect the future of the galaxy, like... I don't know, rendering eezo inert or something like that).

Personally, though, I have to say, the 'our motivation is beyond your understanding' concept is complete bull. We can understand your motivations just fine. Motivation is nothing more than 'what do I want?' Your reasoning for why it is that you do what you must may be based on completely alien logic that makes no sense to our standards of ration, reason, or morality, but we can understand your motivation just fine.

[Legion of 1337]

sH0tgUn jUliA wrote...

Legion of 1337 wrote...

Ok now I must know:

For everyone who said "no" and never elaborated, why is a Gainax Ending (unexplainable and confusing nonsense - what we got) preferable to a Lovecraft Ending (unexplainable and confusing nonsense on purpose for a reason)?

Neither one is preferable. They're both nonsense. It didn't matter. I said I didn't need to know any reason for their existence. The ending was still going to be confusing nonsense anyway.

Why is dark energy lovecraftian? A human reaper processing dark energy to save the galaxy is still horse**** and if you destroy them it makes you the villain in the end and makes them the good guys. 

It is no different than what we got. They're harvesting us so we don't create another type of synthetic like them. They're the good guys. If we destroy them we'll create synthetics again and there's nothing to stop us from creating one that'll destroy all organic life in the galaxy. And we kill our allies and commit genocide, or we create a dystopia, or a whatever. We become the villain. 

Take your pick. Both endings are the same version of this: 

It isn't necessarily Lovecraftian, but you coudl write it that way and thus have a good ending with an interesting moral dilemma that pits your love of the characters against the overarcing plot.

Sovereign flat out says in the first game the Reapers are Lovecraft-style primordeal beings that have always existed without beginning or end, with motives and reasoning that defy explaination by lesser beings. The idea of a bunch of mysterious beings whose nature and motivations are unknown using primitive life to create more of themselves to eventually manipulate the entire universe and the laws of physics to their will is so far beyond everyday reality that the implications and explanations of it boggle the mind (which is the whole point - Lovecraft antagonists are supposed to be thinking on a higher order than us, thus we are unable to comprehend exactly what they are doing). And all they give us to sway our opinion is that they are doing it to save the entire universe from being destroyed. Since we can't comprehend how they plan on doing it or why or even if that assertion is true, instinctively we wouldn't believe them and blow them all up. Since most players just care about getting a happy ending where everyone lives, most players would do this too. But it would show everyone in the end that the Reapers may in fact have been right (you can leave that ambiguous), an interesting thought point on how we deal with situations beyond our everyday understanding.

And also prove why Hollywood makes every movie with a happy ending.

The point of a Lovecraft ending is not to give everyone the best feels - it's to make you wonder at the nature of our very existence and the limitations of our understanding of reality.

Of course, this is assuming any of those people coudl actually write good Lovecraft.

Modifié par Legion of 1337, 11 novembre 2013 - 07:56 .

[His Name was HYR!!]

 I get that it was "just a draft" and "could have been improved on," but I find the D.E.E. concept plot utterly boring.


Eezo will kill us all (sometime way down the line)? Le yawn.

[His Name was HYR!!]

dgcatanisiri wrote...


Personally, though, I have to say, the 'our motivation is beyond your understanding' concept is complete bull. We can understand your motivations just fine. Motivation is nothing more than 'what do I want?' Your reasoning for why it is that you do what you must may be based on completely alien logic that makes no sense to our standards of ration, reason, or morality, but we can understand your motivation just fine.

QFT!

When it comes down to it, this fascination with "unknown motivations"-nonsense is just that... nonsense.

It's literally impossible to create such a thing. If the writer can know the villain's motive, then the audience can too. If the Reapers are simply dismissively telling us "It is not a thing you can comprehend," all it means is that they think we won't get it, not that we actually can't. It doesn't make them "above our comprehension", it just means they're keeping it hidden from us.

[Redbelle]

HYR 2.0 wrote...

 I get that it was "just a draft" and "could have been improved on," but I find the D.E.E. concept plot utterly boring.


Eezo will kill us all (sometime way down the line)? Le yawn.

The message was supposed to be one of disarmament?

Keep using DE systems and you'll cause the Big Crunch?

And the above doesn't care?

Sounds like someone mixed the threat of nukes with an environmental spin on the story.