Same thing that happened on Rannoch. Check out the planet descriptions for Adas and Haestrom. No dialogue acknowledges it, though.What happened to the quarian colonies?
Yes, that's the sort of thing that makes the difference between a good game and an awesome one.
nvm, my original question lacked any logic.
They won a lot of money, dont be afraid.I read somewhere that EA had recorded a big profit on the game, consequence of the MP I think.
You've gotta wonder just how much people have spent on microtransactions. I recently got into The Simpsions: Tapped Out for iOS of all things, and they want you to pay real-world money for "premium items" to place in your Springfield, like a park bench with a towel draped over it.They won a lot of money, dont be afraid.I read somewhere that EA had recorded a big profit on the game, consequence of the MP I think.
What happened to the quarian colonies?
Those who could not escape from the colony worlds were wiped out by the Geth that were on them as well. They were networked via QEC.
They're networked, but I never saw anything about Geth use of QEC technology.Those who could not escape from the colony worlds were wiped out by the Geth that were on them as well. They were networked via QEC.
Same thing that happened on Rannoch. Check out the planet descriptions for Adas and Haestrom. No dialogue acknowledges it, though.
Something else I thought was interesting was Lusia. Turns out the Council fired the opening shots of the Krogan Rebellions, ignoring the Krogan's piecemeal annexation the galaxy until an Asari colony close to their homeworld was targeted.
They appeased the Krogan, then the Krogan tried to annex France.... er Lusia.
They're networked, but I never saw anything about Geth use of QEC technology.
Think numbers. The numbers of Geth on the Colonies were less than those on Rannoch. Hence there wouldn't have been enough to form the critical mass necessary to gain the level of intelligence. The logical conclusion is that they had to network with the main consensus and the only way to do that in real time would be via QEC which is all over the galaxy. It is never stated, but one can logically come to that conclusion.
Think numbers. The numbers of Geth on the Colonies were less than those on Rannoch. Hence there wouldn't have been enough to form the critical mass necessary to gain the level of intelligence. The logical conclusion is that they had to network with the main consensus and the only way to do that in real time would be via QEC which is all over the galaxy. It is never stated, but one can logically come to that conclusion.
Is there any information about how many geth need to be networked to have sufficient intelligence? Although it wasn't completely clear on the subject the implecation is that there were enough just on the Alarei (although you can't rule out more than just enough to think "shoot anything that moves" in that situation).
I think the Geth aren't that stupid when they are alone, they are just not capble of stuff like doing research without a link to their consensus.
@DeinonSlayer
1) The statements "The Geth killed billions" and "the Geth exterminated everyone who couldn't be evacuated from Rannoch" are two different statements. One does not logically imply the other.
2) Are you serious? "Of course, if we can cure the Genophage and put a stop to the endless stillborn dead babies, that would take a priority over any societal reforms." The idea that Wrex would not pursue a cure for the Genophage when one is available is not realistic.
@MassivelyEffective0730
1) You used the word "hate" originally to characterize how you thought Shepard was defined, so I responded with the same word. What I should have said was that you're projecting hate onto Shepard - but "hate" is a reasonable and natural response for Shepard to have. In a similar way, you can project other feelings on to Shepard with respect to Cerberus, just not active current support.
Why you would not hate the organization that, among other things, raided Grissom Academy, executed the Citadel coup, and stopped Shepard from gaining secret of the Catalyst on Thessia is your own business.
2) I can easily see a character being forced into an unexpected, perhaps even unwanted, dream as part of a tabletop RPG for roleplaying purposes, so I don't see why it would be an issue in an RPG video game.
3) Its true, I do think this point as ridiculous. My original question was: what POV are you suddenly unable roleplay? You brought this up, but it is something you could never really do, hence ME3 is not exactly suddenly worse at this with respect to be the other two games.
Mass Effect 2 is a story about a squabbling combative crew that has to be made to work together for the Suicide Mission. Because of the conflicting beliefs certain members would become alienated based on Shepard's decisions. That isn't the story of the crew in ME3, hence you can't get the same interactions from them ( aside from behaving in such a way as to cause Tali and Wrex to die). My point is that, in and of itself, the relationships that Shepard forms has very little to with defining Shepard beyond to the opportunity to allow Shepard to make a decision. We've already had the story where companions got annoyed in ME2 based on decisions. ME3 is a different story. Shepard is defined by decisions he makes, and there are plenty of those to be made in ME3.
4) We have the ability to RP to a high degree in ME3 - you are just asking for more.
I've played Renegade in all three games, and I never got the sense that I was telling Hackett, or Anderson, or the Alliance any of the stuff you're talking about in ME1 and ME2. But for the sake of argument, let's just assume that you could do that in ME1 and M2. In ME1 Shepard has a Specter mission, and is constantly side-tracked by Alliance requests. In ME2 Shepard is working outside the Alliance and Council with a known terrorist organization. In these two stories there is opportunity for Shepard to come into conflict with the Alliance, so that would be why Shepard could decide to do so. In ME3, the story is that the Alliance is supporting you and your decisions to gain support to fight the Reapers. Telling the Alliance off would essentially be b****ing to Hackett, the guy holding the remains of the Alliance fleet together, or Anderson, the guy running the resistance against the Reapers on Earth. I think your request is unreasonable, unsupported by the story in ME3, and needlessly confrontational. I don't see any reason why Bioware owes that behavior to any player in ME3 for roleplaying purposes.
I'm pretty sure you've seen this before (and I'm pretty sure you ignored it then and will do so again now), but once more, from Mass Effect: Revelation:@DeinonSlayer
1) The statements "The Geth killed billions" and "the Geth exterminated everyone who couldn't be evacuated from Rannoch" are two different statements. One does not logically imply the other.
See, this argument coming from him would make me less likely to side with Wrex. Ignoring social reform and cranking out new Krogan as fast as they can? Cure it now, now, now, and to hell with the consequences? People like Wreav have a very different idea about what to do with their new numbers.2) Are you serious? "Of course, if we can cure the Genophage and put a stop to the endless stillborn dead babies, that would take a priority over any societal reforms." The idea that Wrex would not pursue a cure for the Genophage when one is available is not realistic.
Is there any information about how many geth need to be networked to have sufficient intelligence? Although it wasn't completely clear on the subject the implecation is that there were enough just on the Alarei (although you can't rule out more than just enough to think "shoot anything that moves" in that situation).
Remember the Geth on the Alarei were 300 years more advanced than the Geth during the Morning War.
@DeinonSlayer
1) So great. Now that you've moved away from judging ME3 as worse than the ME2 and ME1 with respect to it's presentation of the conflict, and have decided again to pull in Anderson's POV from the novel which does not use the words "exterminated everyone who couldn't be evacuated" to make a Geth/Quarian conflict case which apparently is relevant to every thread where someone says they don't like the ending, I can just step away from this point an leave you to your more holistic and complete understanding.
2) The issue is the cure itself. No one in their right mind would countenance a Genophage for themselves to enact social reforms. And since I don't think you fully understand just how beyond appalling it would be selectively disperse a cure to only Wrex's allies, I'm going to have to step away from this point as well.
I'm pretty sure you've seen this before (and I'm pretty sure you ignored it then and will do so again now), but once more, from Mass Effect: Revelation:
Three hundred years ago, long before humanity appeared on the galactic scene, the quarian species had created a race of synthetic servants to serve as an expandable and expendable labor source. The geth, as they were called, were not true AIs: their neural networks were developed in a way that was highly restrictive and self-limiting. Despite this precaution, the geth eventually turned on their quarian masters, validating all the dire warnings and predictions.
The quarians had neither the numbers nor the ability to stand against their former servants. In a short but savage war their entire society was wiped out. Only a few million survivors - less than one percent of their entire population - escaped the genocide, fleeing their home world in a massive fleet, refugees forced to live in exile.
In the aftermath of the war, the geth became a completely isolationist society. Cutting off all contact with the organic species of the galaxy, they expanded their territory into the unexplored reaches behind a vast nebulae cloud known as the Perseus Veil. Every attempt to open diplomatic channels with them failed: emissary vessels sent to open negotiations were attacked and destroyed the moment they entered geth space.
Fleets from every species in Citadel space massed on the borders of the Veil as the Council prepared for a massive geth invasion. But the expected attack never came. Gradually the fleets were scaled back, until now, several centuries after the quarians were driven out, only a few patrols remained to monitor the region for signs of geth aggression.
So, can you tell me again why none of this was worth mentioning in ME3?
See, this argument coming from him would make me less likely to side with Wrex. Ignoring social reform and cranking out new Krogan as fast as they can? Cure it now, now, now, and to hell with the consequences? People like Wreav have a very different idea about what to do with their new numbers.
The issue isn't the cure itself. The issue is universal dispersal, strengthening Wrex's rivals and tossing away the only trump card he had. Even Eve questions if he'll be able to keep the warmongers in check, but we can't challenge Wrex on the wisdom of tossing it to the wind.
Yes, the pro-Geth plot. That's why none of that was ever mentioned in ME3. It was because of "I like Legion." Legion was a unique Geth. The only one who didn't shoot at you. Every other Geth unit shot at you. ME3 is a great place to start. You are supposed to draw the conclusion from a slide show inside the consensus from 300 years ago that has the Quarians in their suits (they should have been out of their suits - my Shepard didn't buy Legion's explanation) that showed the Geth as innocent victims. Those racist Quarians. You were given 1) Admiral Gerrel firing at you; 2) the "mad scientist"; and every pro-Quarian choice was in the renegade position.
And I seriously doubt that two Krogan (Eve and Wrex) would be able to keep the warmongers in check once their numbers were large enough. One generation of Krogan would be sufficient to overpopulate Tuchanka. I think the slide shows that. All you see is a sea of Krogan. Either that or you've doomed their race to extinction. It's so black or white. And they left no way for a partial cure. It was all or nothing. Fun times.
"Escaped the genocide" says exactly that, whether you want to acknowledge it or not. QvG in this thread was just an outbranch on the discussion about uneven portrayal of established conflicts in the series (the others being Cerberus and the Genophage, which together form basically the entire plot). You were the one arguing for the exclusion of these tidbits from their ME3 synopses in the first place. I can only think you don't want people reminded of them because they don't help your side.@DeinonSlayer
1) So great. Now that you've moved away from judging ME3 as worse than the ME2 and ME1 with respect to it's presentation of the conflict, and have decided again to pull in Anderson's POV from the novel which does not use the words "exterminated everyone who couldn't be evacuated" to make a Geth/Quarian conflict case which apparently is relevant to every thread where someone says they don't like the ending, I can just step away from this point an leave you to your more holistic and complete understanding.
Not paragon enough for you? Have it your way. I find it preferable to punishing the entire species, killing Wrex and losing all Krogan support - or spreading the cure indiscriminately, setting Wrex up to be overwhelmed and laying the foundation for another war (yeah, I haven't forgotten the EC slide. Eve still presents it as a valid concern).2) The issue is the cure itself. No one in their right mind would countenance a Genophage for themselves to enact social reforms. And since I don't think you fully understand just how beyond appalling it would be selectively disperse a cure to only Wrex's allies, I'm going to have to step away from this point as well.
And I seriously doubt that two Krogan (Eve and Wrex) would be able to keep the warmongers in check once their numbers were large enough. One generation of Krogan would be sufficient to overpopulate Tuchanka. I think the slide shows that. All you see is a sea of Krogan.
That pic doesn't look any more crowded than Times Square.
Try again, this time without inventing strawmen.
show me where i put up a straw man arguement. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Straw_man .
straw man arguement is just that an arguement. the OP asked a question and i asnwered with my opinion. how could a straw man arguement be gleaned from what i wrote is beyond me.
show me where i put up a straw man arguement. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Straw_man .
straw man arguement is just that an arguement. the OP asked a question and i asnwered with my opinion. how could a straw man arguement be gleaned from what i wrote is beyond me.
Silly comments about power trip fantasies. I'm surprised that I even need to point it out.
thats not an arguement its still an opinion. you said theres a straw man arguement where an argument didnt even exist in the first place. 1 person, the OP, asked me a question. he took no stance whatsoever.
the power fantasy aspect of my opinion is based on experience, as a combat vet im telling you 3 people couldnt do what shep does multiple times throughout the series. enemies always coming at you 1 by 1 or in small waves is a joke. i fought terrorists that knew nothing of tech outside of herding goats with more tact than that.
Yep, that's what happens in most games, particularly where you're in control of a single character. Suggest a more realistic option that works for an RPG and can actually be implemented. You'll notice that a lot of the common complaints are that it's just Shepard plus a couple of others vs. everyone else (the whole "didn't see the war assets in action" thing). I doubt anyone says that "Yay, I'm the hero who can take on armies with just myself and two others" is the thing that really appeals to them about ME, yet that seems to be what you're saying - hence the strawman accusation.
the end to me3 is an inconsistantcy. you win over and over again and then bam, no matter what you loose...but that doesnt even matter. what ever my opinion was to my original post doesnt matter. a straw man arguement is just that an arguement. it takes 2 to tango.
the entirety of the OP's post (the initial person i was talking to) says things like "Sure they show all the good stuff happening to the others in the universe but nothing more on shepard who saved billions of people" and "So if I did everything to get the best possible outcome, why do I feel like someone kicked me in the
quads?" it seems to me that hes a badass and then "just one breath to hint at survival laying there with a boulder on her head."
do you understand now why i felt it was a power fantasy for THE OP. that, ill say it a 100th time, had no stance on what i said what-so-ever.
No, because I think you're latching on to the "saved billions of people" point. Doing a good job and expecting a good result isn't the same thing as a power fantasy.
im going to go ahead and question your intelligence here. you obviously dont know what a straw man (<---how its correctlly spelled) is. i gave you a link that even had examples. you understand that the original poster had no arguement? he only had questions and examples for his logic in coming to the frustration he/she did. not one time did he make an arguement for anything and neither did i.
ill tell you why youre upset. you think i imposed my assumption onto you and everyone else in the BSN.in essense saying that evreryone thinks its a power trip. i understand, this place is toxic and youre almost always under constant attack by some one who disagrees with you. its cool man, no need to get all jumpy. i can only ask you to reread my post and inflect on it a position of only the OP and i are talking to each other (how it should be read as i spoke of him directly). im using his own examples of empowerment/ disempowerment to come to my conclusions. that still doesnt make it a straw man. i never like to just assume anything but look at what i was given to formulate a response...
I BELIEVE THE OP THINKS OF IT AS POWER, I NEVER MENTION ANYONE ELSE.
Retour en haut