28 réponses à ce sujet

[sH0tgUn jUliA]

The dreams were there for "the feelz." Yes they were supposed to be symbolic. We got that. They were a pain in the ass to play through. They should have made them cutscenes. The dream sequences really could have been dropped, IMO. Sorry, that would not be heroic enough for some people.

[Ieldra]

SwobyJ wrote...
That said, Mass Effect tries not to step on anyone's toes too much, and allows various beliefs.

I feel very much stepped on my toes by the Synthesis' mysticism, since for instance, using the term "essence" implies it's more than simple information (if it weren't, why not use that term). The same with EDI at the CB: the cut version speaks of "destructive analysis", which is a perfectly understandable term. The published version replaced that with the "essence of the species" phrase. I must go from the assumption that both EDI and the Catalyst are trying to be as clear as they can. If "destructive analysis" is perfectly clear (and it is to the point that I inferred this is what happens before I knew of the cut version) but it isn't used, I must conclude the phrase is not meant to be appropriate. Which means that the story wants me to believe in mystical concepts. Sorry, I don't go there without a lot more grounding in lore. To see how to ground such things in an SF work, see Peter F Hamilton's "Night's Dawn". He did that.....in the prologue. Yes, it is possible to enjoy a story with a premise you fundamentally do not believe in, even in SF, but it must be done right.

[dirtdog13]

spinachdiaper wrote...

it is PTSD, Survivor's guilt, and what happens when Bioware killed a npc kid for dramatic effect

this

[Obadiah]

Main post edited just 'cause I'm working some stuff out.