150 réponses à ce sujet

[Deathsaurer]

FlyingSquirrel wrote...

That's a good point about the database, though given that all this originated from the Catalyst misunderstanding its directive, you can rationalize that it simply viewed the Leviathans as the "model" for advanced life forms. As for educating younger species, the Catalyst seems to want to let them develop without direct intervention - the Leviathan who talks to Shepard refers to much of galactic history being a sort of experiment by the Catalyst, IIRC.

Both points are valid but the inherent flaw in them is apparent. Of course I'm not the one running the cyclical galactic harvests so what do I know.

Modifié par Deathsaurer, 12 novembre 2013 - 10:14 .

[Argentoid]

Imanol de Tafalla wrote...

I believe that what we got was better than Drew Karpyshyn's proposed ending.  

Though, even DK himself said that his proposition was only a draft and would also be also be met with negativity.

Chris L'Etoile (former BW writer) hated it, as far as I know.

[maaaad365]

tonnactus wrote...

maaaad365 wrote...


Remember that Harbinger tells Shepard that the humans are the perfect specimens for a Reaper, a concept lost/contradicted in ME3 where almost all the species are harvested without any discrimination.

Thank god they removed the humans are special nonsense.

ME2's main plot was that and ME3's main plot-hole was that.  They ommited it hoping the people didn't notice the obvious contadiction. Maybe Harbinger was insane the whole time of ME2......maybe the Collectors didn't exist.... maybe the construction of the HUMAN reaper wasn't supposed to stop the invasion of the Reapers in ME3.

I'm not too happy they contradicted what ME 2 was all about.

Modifié par maaaad365, 13 novembre 2013 - 01:47 .

[The Night Mammoth]

Argentoid wrote...

Imanol de Tafalla wrote...

I believe that what we got was better than Drew Karpyshyn's proposed ending.  

Though, even DK himself said that his proposition was only a draft and would also be also be met with negativity.

Chris L'Etoile (former BW writer) hated it, as far as I know.

This is correct. I think L'Etoile leans toward hard science rather than the sort of techno-magic that the Dark Energy ending involved, if his thoughts on AI's, Legion and the geth in ME2 are anything to go by.

[Sanunes]

I really don't think it would have made that much more of a difference except it would have drawn upon the "minor" mentions of Dark Matter in the previous games. After meeting Sovereign in Mass Effect 1 I knew they painted themselves into a corner for I couldn't see a way of beating anything as advanced has they portrayed The Reapers to be.

From a lot of what I read on the BSN after the game was released the plot didn't matter that much the major issues with the ending were the Star Kid, how you don't end up alive, or the endings themselves.

Modifié par Sanunes, 13 novembre 2013 - 04:23 .

[Han Shot First]

No, I think would have been worse honestly. Drew's ending would have turned the Reapers into misunderstood good guys saving us all from the heat death of the universe. Would anyone really have been happy with a twist ending where Shepard is revealed to to be the villain fighting against the galaxy's salvation?

I think Drew's planned ending also suffers from the same problem as Mac's and Casey's: a need to give the Reapers complex motives that are revealed in a twist ending. I don't think Mass Effect needed any 'I see dead people' moment in the end game. Mass Effect is a space opera, the equivalent of Buck Rogers or Star Wars. Its not that deep.

[David7204]

It was very heavily foreshadowed the Reapers had some sort of meaningful motive from the beginning. That foreshadowing is a promise that needs to be fulfilled. So yes, they do need a motive.

[Han Shot First]

David7204 wrote...

It was very heavily foreshadowed the Reapers had some sort of meaningful motive from the beginning. That foreshadowing is a promise that needs to be fulfilled. So yes, they do need a motive.

They needed a motive yes, but if should have been more simplistic and straightforward. Once you start trying to come up with an interesting twist (when one wasn't needed) you're likely to end up with bad ideas like Star Children or Heat Death Saviors.

Modifié par Han Shot First, 13 novembre 2013 - 05:53 .

[David7204]

What 'simplistic' and 'straightforward' motive satisfies the Reaper's behavior? Afraid of other species challenging them? It makes no sense to leave the younger species alone. Harvesting slaves or resources? Makes no sense; there are far, far more efficient and easier methods.

It's difficult, yes, and most people will fail at coming up with something satisfying. And yes, BioWare failed as well. If it was easy, anybody could do it.

[AlanC9]

Han Shot First wrote...
Would anyone really have been happy with a twist ending where Shepard is revealed to to be the villain fighting against the galaxy's salvation?

Maybe I would have been. Maybe. 

Which probably just proves that the idea really was as flawed as you think.

[Armass81]

Plus of it being stupid, it would have made all our efforts and most of our accomplishments in vain, as in the end youre served 2 glasses of bitter poison to choose from.

Modifié par Armass81, 13 novembre 2013 - 06:42 .

[Armass81]

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

Grass always seems greener on the other side of the fence. Its not, its a bitter desert out there.

[Tron Mega]

David7204 wrote...

Probably not.

I never knew u could be so unsure about something.

[Nero Narmeril]

I remember lot of people saying 'dark energy plot were BETTER than actual ending'. What happened since... like 6 months?

[Han Shot First]

Nero Narmeril wrote...

I remember lot of people saying 'dark energy plot were BETTER than actual ending'. What happened since... like 6 months?

I think what happened was that people who hadn't necessarily been on the forums in awhile read Drew's statement or news articles or blogs quoting it, and logged into the forums to post about how much better that idea would have been. A lot of them have since drifted on again to other corners of the net.

Back then not everyone was agreeing with those posts. I know I posted in a couple of those threads saying I thought it was both a bad idea and that Drew is overrated, and I wasn't the only one voicing that opinion. So the people posting in this thread that they don't think it would have worked, aren't necessarily the same people who thought it was a good idea a few months back.

Modifié par Han Shot First, 14 novembre 2013 - 06:07 .

[Lord_Nikon]

Han Shot First wrote...

David7204 wrote...

It was very heavily foreshadowed the Reapers had some sort of meaningful motive from the beginning. That foreshadowing is a promise that needs to be fulfilled. So yes, they do need a motive.

They needed a motive yes, but if should have been more simplistic and straightforward. Once you start trying to come up with an interesting twist (when one wasn't needed) you're likely to end up with bad ideas like Star Children or Heat Death Saviors.

Their motive was they wanted to destroy all advanced life, done. End of story for thier motive, at least that is what it should have been.  

The best Naritives for "Bad Guys" never really explain why they are the way they are.  The Empire in Star Wars?  Just power hungry.  Voldemort? Didn't want to Die.  Sauron, just and evil bastard.  The Lannisters, just power hungry.

[Mcfly616]

So you wanted it to be dumbed down and simplistic/straightforward.....yet, their purpose is supposed to be "beyond our comprehension"



Hmm

[David7204]

And that's stupid.

If they hated advanced life, there's utterly no reason for them to spare the younger civilizations and wait for them to grow powerful.

I agree. I really can't think of a good villain with a 'complex' motive. They all break down under scrutiny. Nevertheless, if a story is to have a villain with a simple motive, it should be simple from the beginning. Mass Effect went in the opposite direction, extensively foreshadowing it's villain as mysterious and purposeful.

Modifié par David7204, 15 novembre 2013 - 03:08 .

[angol fear]

Lord_Nikon wrote...

Han Shot First wrote...

David7204 wrote...

It was very heavily foreshadowed the Reapers had some sort of meaningful motive from the beginning. That foreshadowing is a promise that needs to be fulfilled. So yes, they do need a motive.

They needed a motive yes, but if should have been more simplistic and straightforward. Once you start trying to come up with an interesting twist (when one wasn't needed) you're likely to end up with bad ideas like Star Children or Heat Death Saviors.

Their motive was they wanted to destroy all advanced life, done. End of story for thier motive, at least that is what it should have been.  

The best Naritives for "Bad Guys" never really explain why they are the way they are.  The Empire in Star Wars?  Just power hungry.  Voldemort? Didn't want to Die.  Sauron, just and evil bastard.  The Lannisters, just power hungry.

Maybe, it's not like the Empire, Voldemort and any "Bad guys".

[Linkenski]

The problem with revealing the Reapers' motive was the whole "We are beyond your comprehension bit" which kinda implied they had something that, by their nature, was purposeful, but because they were beyond the comprehension of ordinary organics like Human and Asari etc. I'd argue that no writer could've given them a motive that would live up to that premise.

Either way the motive was going to be either complete nonsense to us, or following our human logic and that would kinda contradict the "beyond your comprehension" bit, because it also had to be something that was beyond the players' level of understanding.

Now I kinda wonder if they made it illogical on purpose? The stupid thing about the endings or at least the original one, is that the Reapers just seem ultra-dumb instead of super-intelligent.

[Mathias]

The Reaper motivation should've remained unexplained. It would've been a lot more effective and though I'm sure some people would've been upset because they didn't get "muh twist", I think it would've been better for the series.

In the Mass Effect universe, the only race that truly felt Alien to us were The Reapers. You can call that Asari or the Salarians aliens, but in reality we knew so much about them individually and culturally that calling them aliens didn't make much sense. The Reapers on the other hand were truly unknowable, and that's what made them so much more effective as villains. They're a legion of behemoth sized space monsters that obliterate advanced organics every 50k years, and there's nothing to stop them. That alone makes them terrifying, but the fact that we don't know why they're doing it or who they are or where they come from, makes them THAT much more scary. People tend to fear what they don't understand. Every time a Reaper spoke to you in the game it was such an intense and memorable moment, because you could literally feel the pressure from them as they spoke to you in that horrifying voice.

But instead Bioware decided to explain the motivation behind the Reapers. First off by doing that you run the gambit of delivering a poorly thought out explanation behind the Reapers. Which is what essentially happened. They failed right outta the gate to deliver a well written and shocking revelation. Now obviously not every player thought it was poor. There are exceptions our there and I'm not ignoring those people. But as a whole it didn't connect well with the audience.

Bottom line, it would've more effective and at least safe if the Reaper motivation just wasn't explained at all at the end of ME3. It should've been left up to the viewer.

Modifié par Mdoggy1214, 15 novembre 2013 - 05:18 .

[Argentoid]

Mdoggy1214 wrote...

The Reaper motivation should've remained unexplained.

In a parallel universe where the Reaper motivation was left unexplained, people are claiming for a "Reaper Motivation" DLC.

Modifié par Argentoid, 15 novembre 2013 - 08:33 .

[marcelo caldas]

Anything would be better, but the dark energy thing is not an ending, unless the human reaper could press a button and solve the problem, wicht it is what the crucible does.

Until this date I wonder why the reapers din't have a harvest machine with the same principle, press a button and a pulse of magic automatically kills/converts everyone to whatever they see fit.