1765 réponses à ce sujet

[78stonewobble]

iakus wrote...

The Catalyst scene.  All of it.  EC does not help ("organic energy"?  Really?)  Brings the entire trilogy (which was alrady pretty shaky) crashing down

But if we're leaving out the immediately obvious, I'd say the VS confrontation on Horizon

VS: "Shepard!  You're alive!  What are you..."
::assuming direct control::
VS:"...traitor!  You make me sick, you sick piece of filth, working for Cerberus like you are!"

Shepard: "Ash/Kaidan!  Thank goodness you're all right!  Listen, the Collectors are behind the attacks.  Find, Tali, she can conf..."
::assuming direct control::
Shepard:  "Hey Ash/Kaidan.  Long time no see.  Wanna join Cerberus?  It'll be just like old times"

Agreed...

Though as op says Liara on illium pre lotsb is awkward too...

EDIT and PS: I'm rewatching star trek the next generation ... it's not all gold either

Modifié par 78stonewobble, 11 février 2014 - 11:20 .

[RangerSG]

George Costanza wrote...

Why do the Reapers disguise the fact that the Citadel is a mass relay that paves the way for their return, and subsequently not return when Sovereign fails, when there's a mass relay next to the Citadel anyway?

Ahem. This is actually explained. The Citadel relay is set to receive from Dark Space, where the Reapers are waiting. They can't leap into 'any' Relay from Dark Space. The lore explains the nature of primary relay vs transit relays. Primary relays link between 2 and only 2 places. The Citadel is 1 of these. It's link is to Dark Space. It functions as the 'hub' via the control network within and the (several, if you read the entry on the Widow System) relays around it that are the only way to navigate the faux-Nebula.

So they aren't the same kind of relay, they can't just switch on any.

[RangerSG]

txgoldrush wrote...

RangerSG wrote...

txgoldrush wrote...

RangerSG wrote...

fr33stylez wrote...

I think that they should've just kept the story of the Crucible simple. "We have the plans, we know what it does, it was eft here by X, we need time to build it."

The whole "we're not sure what it does but we can build it and no one ever knew what it did but added to its design" was hogwash and unnecessary. no need to over-complicate the superweapon.

Agreed. Superweapons aren't that unusual a plot device in military sci-fi. Needing one to defeat the Reapers is believable. Having it use the Relay network is no less so. That a weapon based on exploiting the relays needs the Citadel to fire is not a vast leap of logic, given the Citadel's status as hub of the network. 

So what was their 'not to know'? It was an unnecessary drama. Logical extrapolation should have told them everything Vendetta did. 

There is one event, that's in the narrative, that causes the Alliance to build the Crucible out of blind but not unfounded faith.

Liara did NOT get everything in Mars, Cerberus got Vendetta;s location.

Lets say that Liara did get Vendetta's location....then we would be going to Thessia, not Palaven and the Crucible thing would have been more figured out.

Nevermind it makes sense for the Alliance to put faith in what they thought to be a Prothean device....the Protheans were responsible for helping defeat the Reaper plot in ME1, Nevermind they have no other option.

Nevermind that Hackett foreshadowed what it does after the Citadel coup sequence.

Thinking it was a Prothean Device doesn't mean an AI pulls the trigger. After all, it's clear the Protheans were even more anti-AI than the Citadel races are.

I didn't say Liara got everything in Mars. And I'm not saying they didn't need time to decode the information. What I'm noting is directly related to the Catalyst. Even if they needed the VI to tell them how it functions, that doesn't explain why a device built by organics in a war against AIs would resort to ANY Ai to pull the trigger on their weapon. Needing the Citadel makes sense, to the point that if they figured out the weapon uses the relay network, discerning that they needed the hub of said network was a logical conclusion. Sure, they still need Vendetta for the particulars. But there was no logical reason needing the Citadel required Starbrat.
 

You are not getting it. The AI does not pull the trigger. Shepard did.

And evidence shows that Vendetta was WRONG about the nature of the Catalyst. He did NOT know there was an AI on the Citadel. Vendetta thought the Catalyst was the citadel itself, because it amplifies dark energy emissions.

From the evidence shown in the narrative, no one knew there was an AI on the Citadel.

And if the AI was always in control of the Citadel, then ME1 was a joke, there was no need for Sovereign as a sentinel, or Saren to turn on the Citadel Relay. The Catabrat could've done it himself. 

Either way, it's a gigantic frakking plot hole that destroys the narrative. You can choose which is worse: Vendetta being wrong, or ME1 being utterly pointless. 

[txgoldrush]

starlitegirlx wrote...

txgoldrush wrote...

RangerSG wrote...

fr33stylez wrote...

I think that they should've just kept the story of the Crucible simple. "We have the plans, we know what it does, it was eft here by X, we need time to build it."

The whole "we're not sure what it does but we can build it and no one ever knew what it did but added to its design" was hogwash and unnecessary. no need to over-complicate the superweapon.

Agreed. Superweapons aren't that unusual a plot device in military sci-fi. Needing one to defeat the Reapers is believable. Having it use the Relay network is no less so. That a weapon based on exploiting the relays needs the Citadel to fire is not a vast leap of logic, given the Citadel's status as hub of the network. 

So what was their 'not to know'? It was an unnecessary drama. Logical extrapolation should have told them everything Vendetta did. 

There is one event, that's in the narrative, that causes the Alliance to build the Crucible out of blind but not unfounded faith.

Liara did NOT get everything in Mars, Cerberus got Vendetta;s location.

Lets say that Liara did get Vendetta's location....then we would be going to Thessia, not Palaven and the Crucible thing would have been more figured out.

Nevermind it makes sense for the Alliance to put faith in what they thought to be a Prothean device....the Protheans were responsible for helping defeat the Reaper plot in ME1, Nevermind they have no other option.

Nevermind that Hackett foreshadowed what it does after the Citadel coup sequence.

Except the fact that Cerberus got Vendetta's location and doesn't get there until you do when you didn't have it and were only going there because the pompous Asari needed your help to save themselves right at the last part of the game shows how awful the writing is. Cerberus should have gotten there much much sooner. That they didn't makes them out to be nothing more than bumbling fools who spent more time on nonsense than their actual objective. How many things go down before we get to thessia? We cure the genocide, we stop cerberus at every attack they stage, we blow up a monastery, there's the whole coup which I've suspected was because they knew Vendetta's location but that would mean that they already got Vendetta, no? We end the 300 year long quarian/geth war... what else did we do? I'm losing count because essentially we played the WHOLE freaking game minus Thessia, Sanctuary, one last lame cerberus shot at the alliance and finally we get to Kronus.

So that is some horrible writing no matter how you look at it. It's like they had idea but didn't make the sequence make any sense at all.

If they had vendetta's location, they should have gotten vendetta THEN had the coup to get the citadel. That makes a lot more sense now doesn't it? And it would have been a better story. But I guess they couldn't find a way to write it better, but I bet most of us could come up with a better plan than they did.

Plus, everything you do to help on the citadel doesn't even matter. Pointless tasks. They're all dead once the reapers take it. Nothing in there survives. I don't know if that's bad wriring or just nihilisitc and futile.

You really do not get it do you.

You missed the part where Shepard had to access the beacon. Cerberus can't just get it because they cannot access it without the cipher. So they laid a trap and got Vendetta after Shepard activates it. Nevermind Cerberus successfully denied the alliance the full info, slowing efforts to destroy the Reapers.

Its not poor writing, you just are not paying attention. And evidence suggests that they did not figure the info out until right after the coup. Remember, after the coup, TIM tells Kai Leng that he has other plans in motion. Nevermind that EDI told a grieving Liara after Thessia that she would need Shepards cipher to access it.

You are also forgetting that TIM seeks to control the Reapers, but sees control as the ONLY option, therefore Shepard must be stopped. That's why there is the coup among efforts to sabotage the Krogan.

And I guess you missed the fact where the Wards are pretty much active when you are talking to TIM at the end of the game. Somehow goes against your very notion that everyone in the Citadel is dead.

Modifié par txgoldrush, 12 février 2014 - 08:11 .

[txgoldrush]

RangerSG wrote...

txgoldrush wrote...

RangerSG wrote...

txgoldrush wrote...

RangerSG wrote...

fr33stylez wrote...

I think that they should've just kept the story of the Crucible simple. "We have the plans, we know what it does, it was eft here by X, we need time to build it."

The whole "we're not sure what it does but we can build it and no one ever knew what it did but added to its design" was hogwash and unnecessary. no need to over-complicate the superweapon.

Agreed. Superweapons aren't that unusual a plot device in military sci-fi. Needing one to defeat the Reapers is believable. Having it use the Relay network is no less so. That a weapon based on exploiting the relays needs the Citadel to fire is not a vast leap of logic, given the Citadel's status as hub of the network. 

So what was their 'not to know'? It was an unnecessary drama. Logical extrapolation should have told them everything Vendetta did. 

There is one event, that's in the narrative, that causes the Alliance to build the Crucible out of blind but not unfounded faith.

Liara did NOT get everything in Mars, Cerberus got Vendetta;s location.

Lets say that Liara did get Vendetta's location....then we would be going to Thessia, not Palaven and the Crucible thing would have been more figured out.

Nevermind it makes sense for the Alliance to put faith in what they thought to be a Prothean device....the Protheans were responsible for helping defeat the Reaper plot in ME1, Nevermind they have no other option.

Nevermind that Hackett foreshadowed what it does after the Citadel coup sequence.

Thinking it was a Prothean Device doesn't mean an AI pulls the trigger. After all, it's clear the Protheans were even more anti-AI than the Citadel races are.

I didn't say Liara got everything in Mars. And I'm not saying they didn't need time to decode the information. What I'm noting is directly related to the Catalyst. Even if they needed the VI to tell them how it functions, that doesn't explain why a device built by organics in a war against AIs would resort to ANY Ai to pull the trigger on their weapon. Needing the Citadel makes sense, to the point that if they figured out the weapon uses the relay network, discerning that they needed the hub of said network was a logical conclusion. Sure, they still need Vendetta for the particulars. But there was no logical reason needing the Citadel required Starbrat.
 

You are not getting it. The AI does not pull the trigger. Shepard did.

And evidence shows that Vendetta was WRONG about the nature of the Catalyst. He did NOT know there was an AI on the Citadel. Vendetta thought the Catalyst was the citadel itself, because it amplifies dark energy emissions.

From the evidence shown in the narrative, no one knew there was an AI on the Citadel.

And if the AI was always in control of the Citadel, then ME1 was a joke, there was no need for Sovereign as a sentinel, or Saren to turn on the Citadel Relay. The Catabrat could've done it himself. 

Either way, it's a gigantic frakking plot hole that destroys the narrative. You can choose which is worse: Vendetta being wrong, or ME1 being utterly pointless. 

Ever thought that the Catalyst controls the Citadel THROUGH the Keepers. There is no plot hole and the Leviathan DLC suggests that he runs on thralls. Nevermind that the Catalyst is actually a consensus of Reapers, therefore, the vanguard is needed to send info back to the consensus.

And really, the entire Prothean plot is actually pretty poorly explained in ME1. We do not hear details on how they sabotaged the Keepers, only that they did. Hell, how do they even know what signals to jam centuries after the signal was sent?. Sounds pretty contrived to me.

Modifié par txgoldrush, 12 février 2014 - 08:20 .

[elrofrost]

The worse scene for me.. anything with Kai Lang. But Thessia when Lang's attack copter pops out of thin hair and he announces "I must recharge" or something like that. I was like, "You've have got to be kidding me". My first run though I almost quit the game at that point. Now after 5 runs I'm used to it.

I must've killed him 4 times before his uses his SWORD oF POWER to bring down the building.

Another scene with Liara in the shuttle landing on Thessia and she gasps something like, "On no my that's my people down there" - referring to how Thessia is burning under the Reapers. I felt like saying "****, Earth and Palaven have been burning for weeks. Deal with it!"

The "endings" didn't bother me so much. Though two choices that I think are valid are Green (Control) or Red (Destroy). Which one depended on if I managed to save the Geth or not. The LI scene in the middle of the battle was sappy.. but ok.

And yes, the scene in ME2 on Horizon with the VS was just insulting.

But you know we are all pointing out the bad scenes.. there are some REALLY great scenes in the series. A few come to mind;

Pushing the merc out of the building; EVERYTHING with Grunt; the "love" conversation with Samara; - are just a few of the many good scenes I enjoy. Which I why I keep replaying the series.

Modifié par elrofrost, 12 février 2014 - 08:27 .

[Ieldra]

@OP:
A lot of things can fall under "poorly written". I don't think I can single out one scene, so I'll mention a few of the worst offenders:

(1) Category "forced protagonist stupidity": The prologue with "It's not about strategy or tactics" and "The Citadel? The fight's here" and the post-Thessia scene (I can't believe nobody has mentioned that one before).

(2) Category "drama over common sense": Post-Thessia, again. Legion's sacrifice, the third encounter with Miranda on the Citadel if you romanced her.

(3) Category "protagonist derailing": encounter with TIM on Mars if you left on reasonably good terms in ME2 and agree with him in principle if not in method. Thane's death. The dreams. Again, post-Thessia.   

(4) Category "violation of lore, world and genre identity": Legion's sacrifice, the explanation of the Synthesis. There are several more of those, but these two are the worst offenders.

And...since the post-Thessia scene appears in three categories, it would get the priiiiize.....for the most poorly written scene in the trilogy. Liara's ME2 scene is a serious contender for a category I didn't mention here, namely "character and plot integrity", but since this one and other similar ones are bad, but never bothered me nearly as much as the above, I consider them lesser offenses.

[George Costanza]

RangerSG wrote...

George Costanza wrote...

Why do the Reapers disguise the fact that the Citadel is a mass relay that paves the way for their return, and subsequently not return when Sovereign fails, when there's a mass relay next to the Citadel anyway?

Ahem. This is actually explained. The Citadel relay is set to receive from Dark Space, where the Reapers are waiting. They can't leap into 'any' Relay from Dark Space. The lore explains the nature of primary relay vs transit relays. Primary relays link between 2 and only 2 places. The Citadel is 1 of these. It's link is to Dark Space. It functions as the 'hub' via the control network within and the (several, if you read the entry on the Widow System) relays around it that are the only way to navigate the faux-Nebula.

So they aren't the same kind of relay, they can't just switch on any.

Ahh! Good. I'm glad there's an explanation for it.

[dreamgazer]

Ieldra2 wrote...

@OP:
A lot of things can fall under "poorly written". I don't think I can single out one scene, so I'll mention a few of the worst offenders:

(1) Category "forced protagonist stupidity": The prologue with "It's not about strategy or tactics" and "The Citadel? The fight's here" and the post-Thessia scene (I can't believe nobody has mentioned that one before).

(2) Category "drama over common sense": Post-Thessia, again. Legion's sacrifice, the third encounter with Miranda on the Citadel if you romanced her.

(3) Category "protagonist derailing": encounter with TIM on Mars if you left on reasonably good terms in ME2 and agree with him in principle if not in method. Thane's death. The dreams. Again, post-Thessia.   

(4) Category "violation of lore, world and genre identity": Legion's sacrifice, the explanation of the Synthesis. There are several more of those, but these two are the worst offenders.

And...since the post-Thessia scene appears in three categories, it would get the priiiiize.....for the most poorly written scene in the trilogy. Liara's ME2 scene is a serious contender for a category I didn't mention here, namely "character and plot integrity", but since this one and other similar ones are bad, but never bothered me nearly as much as the above, I consider them lesser offenses.

What exactly are you referring to with the "post-Thessia scene"?  It sounds like a broad dismissal of an entire chunk of content. 

[Zazzerka]

I think when most people say "post-Thessia" they mean this bit, and the accompanying dialogue. ("..and now Thessia is lost. etc.")



Shepard is sad without the player allowing them to be.

[sH0tgUn jUliA]

Actually I still am forced to go with Bad Writing Theory for the winning choice here.

1) Forced protagonist stupidity? I'm going to split hairs and say bad writing in general. "It's not about strategy or tactics...." I mean these are admirals. They're asking a frigate commander about strategy and tactics. What the hell kind of an answer do they expect? "Why the f*** didn't you use the last three years to build a s***load more ships?" It's a little late for that. It's not like they could have cranked out more than dozen dreadnoughts anyway. Frigates? probably a couple hundred. Then they have to get crews. So what was Shepard supposed to say. "How the f*** should I know? I'm just a frigate commander, Sir. You know, get in close and finish 'em off. I don't think that'll work well."....... "The fight's here." Well, that's supposed to give the Colonist/Ruthless Shepard an attachment to earth. Actually the default Shepard is Earthborn/Sole Survivor, so the rest of us don't count. And the post-Thessia scene? Again I wouldn't call this "forced protagonist stupidity." This falls under Bad Writing Theory. Shepard didn't lose Thessia. Post-Thessia shouldn't have been so apologetic because of it. Shepard should have been mad as hell. How the f*** did Cerberus find out about the beacon if this thing was so secret? This was forced NPC Stupidity - hold secret meeting with Shepard about secret beacon in bugged dead Councilor Udina's office instead of in Asari Councilor's office or in non-bugged more public place. But we don't learn about Udina's office. This story has more plot holes than Dizzy's shorts in Gears of War 3.

2) Drama over Common Sense - well this happens all the time in novels and in movies. It's just that decent writing can make it seem less obvious. We have to remember that even though the average age of people playing the game is well over the age of 25, they are writing for 7th graders. Things have to be made very obvious otherwise people won't understand.

3) Protagonist Derailing - Well I expect a certain amount because they're not going to write two separate games. Martin Sheen costs an arm and a leg for voice acting. The dreams, these were a pain in the ass. And post-Thessia. The protagonist started acting out of character. It's a chunk of content. It's Thessia Joker's on about NOT the temple and losing the Catalyst, and the fact that Shepard nearly died there, not because of the Asari, but because of Cerberus. The joke? It's Thessia and dancing. Bad timing? No. Very bad joke, Joker, worthy of the f***ing airlock. I know they're trying to show war weariness. I'm sorry, but I grew up in the 1960s. They're showing a weak Commander. Get rid of this post-modernist brooding crap. She should be mad as hell. Then there's throwing giving a lot of attention to femShep pre-launch while throwing her under the bus in the game via Jacob and Thane was another one. DO NOT bring up Citadel DLC. Many if not most people stopped playing ME3 by then.

4) Violation of Lore: Legion... et tu Patrick Weekes? This was strictly for the feels. Poor Legion had to give his life so that his fellow geth might see heaven. Barf me out. Synthesis Ending? How about the entire ending is just plain stupid. It's like they needed to find a way to end it and couldn't figure out another way.

Modifié par sH0tgUn jUliA, 12 février 2014 - 09:34 .

[78stonewobble]

A little explanation for me saying the horizon meeting with the VS:

The conversation only made little sense, but it was especially shepards conversation choices that irked me.

It is, to me atleast, the place where the game is the farthest from anything I (or my shepards) could have even imagined saying. That disconnect is just so huuuge there.

[Ieldra]

@Julia:
All the stuff I mentioned falls under the very broad category of "bad writing", but it's not a lot of help if we just say "bad writing" and leave it at that.
Also, it doesn't really matter if Shepard was made intentionally stupid or if the writers didn't know any better. It's bad writing either way since a Shepard that stupid would be inappropriate hero material.

@dreamgazer:
Go to my mission-by-mission review (linked in my sig) and follow the link at the bottom of the OP to the post that contains my review of "Priority: Thessia". I've explained it there.

Modifié par Ieldra2, 12 février 2014 - 11:02 .

[Brovikk Rasputin]

"We fight or we die" is without a doubt up there with the worst. As much as I like the intro overall, that line is just too much for me to handle.

All the pre-final battle speeches. I seriously can't stand that stuff. It always makes the whole situation seem like something from out of a Disney movie. "Alright, let's go and kick some butt, pals! Who's with me! Yeah, as friends we can do anything!" **** that stuff.

[Ieldra]

Ugh...Shepard's speeches. Don't remind me. They were always excessively bad, but in the earlier games we had the "no speeches" option. ME3 not only removed that but gave us the most horrible Shepard speech in the trilogy.

[Susty Randusky]

all scenes were badly written son no 3PAC bioware giving hoots son can't handle getting the bread son multiplayer got 3PAC better son

[txgoldrush]

Zazzerka wrote...

I think when most people say "post-Thessia" they mean this bit, and the accompanying dialogue. ("..and now Thessia is lost. etc.")



Shepard is sad without the player allowing them to be.

But the NARRATIVE allows them to be.

Face it, Shepard screwed up on Thessia. He/She was so focused on finding the Catalyst he/she let their guard down, failing to act on the clue of the dead asari scientists. This leads to Kai Leng surprising them and gaining the upper hand.

There is no forced drama here, he/she failed and lives were at stake.

[txgoldrush]

Ieldra2 wrote...

@OP:
A lot of things can fall under "poorly written". I don't think I can single out one scene, so I'll mention a few of the worst offenders:

(1) Category "forced protagonist stupidity": The prologue with "It's not about strategy or tactics" and "The Citadel? The fight's here" and the post-Thessia scene (I can't believe nobody has mentioned that one before).

(2) Category "drama over common sense": Post-Thessia, again. Legion's sacrifice, the third encounter with Miranda on the Citadel if you romanced her.

(3) Category "protagonist derailing": encounter with TIM on Mars if you left on reasonably good terms in ME2 and agree with him in principle if not in method. Thane's death. The dreams. Again, post-Thessia.   

(4) Category "violation of lore, world and genre identity": Legion's sacrifice, the explanation of the Synthesis. There are several more of those, but these two are the worst offenders.

And...since the post-Thessia scene appears in three categories, it would get the priiiiize.....for the most poorly written scene in the trilogy. Liara's ME2 scene is a serious contender for a category I didn't mention here, namely "character and plot integrity", but since this one and other similar ones are bad, but never bothered me nearly as much as the above, I consider them lesser offenses.

(1) Please tell me, how does Shepard know how to defeat the Reapers when the scene takes place? Sorry, there is no other ways to say it better. Shepard is as lost as anyone lese in the room.

(2) So Legion sacrificing himself isn't common sense? Face it, the scene works and fits the theme of the narrative. And how is the third Miranda scene drama over common sense? Wow

(3) Shepard can't leave TIM on good terms in ME2, not even the Renegade who gives him the base. In fact he warns him. How is Thane's death derailing? Because Shepard does his job and protects the councilor?  The dreams help develop Shepards character and shows who he lost. No derailment there.

(4) The process of synthesis may be a handwave, but the fact that the Reapers favor it is foreshadowed all throughout the trilogy.

And really, you don't even get the post Thessia scene, because if you did, it is a response to Shepard screwing up, to focused on the goal to watch for the ambush. There is nothing forced here. It wasn't drama for the sake of it.

[txgoldrush]

Brovikk Rasputin wrote...

"We fight or we die" is without a doubt up there with the worst. As much as I like the intro overall, that line is just too much for me to handle.

All the pre-final battle speeches. I seriously can't stand that stuff. It always makes the whole situation seem like something from out of a Disney movie. "Alright, let's go and kick some butt, pals! Who's with me! Yeah, as friends we can do anything!" **** that stuff.

Its not a Mass effect thing, its a Bioware thing and I wish they rid of it. Its a Biowarism that they should go away from.

However, the final battle speech in ME3 has Shepard saying that the Reapers do not understand them. This turns out the case in the ending.

[Ieldra]

@txgoldrush:
Read my mission-by-mission review, there I have explained things in detail and have acknowledged the things that work while criticizing those that don't within the scenes mentioned. At this time, I can't be bothered to go into the details again.

Only one thing: On Thessia, Shepard acts as if Thessia could've been saved if he had acted differently. That's a load of crap that makes no sense at all. It is forced drama.

Modifié par Ieldra2, 12 février 2014 - 11:27 .

[txgoldrush]

Ieldra2 wrote...

@txgoldrush:
Read my mission-by-mission review, there I have explained things in detail and have acknowledged the things that work while criticizing those that don't within the scenes mentioned. At this time, I can't be bothered to go into the details again.

Only one thing: On Thessia, Shepard acts as if Thessia could've been saved if he had acted differently. That's a load of crap that makes no sense at all. It is forced drama.

No, I saw it...sorry, but you are trying to criticize ME3 because it isn't what you want it to be, not because of what it is. Most of you criticizing many aspects of the game simply do not see why Bioware made the choices they did.

"I should've known" that Cerberus was there? "Not good enough"? What crazy logic is that?

The logic is, if you see scientists with their throats slit, you keep your guard up. Shepard should have taken it with him instead of trying to talk with it in the temple.

To a point, only towards ending the war much sooner. Even the scene with the asari councilor, its more about Shepard not succeeding than about saving Thessia.

Nevermind that really Shepard does NOT brood for long. The case is being way overstated here.

Modifié par txgoldrush, 12 février 2014 - 11:51 .

[AlexMBrennan]

Shepard should have taken it with him instead of trying to talk with it in the temple.

Well, obviously a beacon hey built a massive temple around would be easy to remove and can be carried by one guy. No special expertise of any kind is necessary to make sure the device isn't damaged.

[RangerSG]

txgoldrush wrote...

Ieldra2 wrote...

@txgoldrush:
Read my mission-by-mission review, there I have explained things in detail and have acknowledged the things that work while criticizing those that don't within the scenes mentioned. At this time, I can't be bothered to go into the details again.

Only one thing: On Thessia, Shepard acts as if Thessia could've been saved if he had acted differently. That's a load of crap that makes no sense at all. It is forced drama.

No, I saw it...sorry, but you are trying to criticize ME3 because it isn't what you want it to be, not because of what it is. Most of you criticizing many aspects of the game simply do not see why Bioware made the choices they did.

"I should've known" that Cerberus was there? "Not good enough"? What crazy logic is that?

The logic is, if you see scientists with their throats slit, you keep your guard up. Shepard should have taken it with him instead of trying to talk with it in the temple.

To a point, only towards ending the war much sooner. Even the scene with the asari councilor, its more about Shepard not succeeding than about saving Thessia.

Nevermind that really Shepard does NOT brood for long. The case is being way overstated here.

I'd agree with you, except  Shepard then tells Anderson, "Losing Thessia wasn't in the playbook." 

Really? The Asari did less to prepare for war than perhaps any Council species. The Asari are repeatedly said to be weak in frontal attacks, which is the 'only' way the Reapers come at you. And the Reapers have steamrolled the 2 largest Navies in the galaxy (Turian and Human) already. Earth and Palavan are burning, it takes the barking Krogan to SLOW the advance of the Reapers on Palavan. And that's seen as a 'miracle.' Countless minor race worlds have been taken.

So tell me, why was losing Thessia not in the playbook? It wasn't going to be a prime Reaper target? Look, if i was Shepard, I'd be more ticked off about losing because I missed the obvious clue (throat cut=sword=phantoms at least=Cerberus nearby). But the dialogue is more about "Oh no! Not Thessia!" It goes back to the triumph of the promotion of Liara over Shepard's own priorities. 

It *should* be about Shepard screwing up and missing what's right there. But it's not. 

That said, it isn't a long scene, and while I want to spacebar my way through that dialogue, it isn't horrific in the sense the endings and the Kai Leng 'fights' are.