167 réponses à ce sujet

[Jorji Costava]

My idea was always that there just should've been a small enough number of Reapers to make it pretty obvious that they couldn't beat the combined forces of the galaxy. This would explain why they shut down the relays; with all the star systems cut off from each other, it allows them to overwhelm each such system individually. With the relay trick no longer available post-ME1, perhaps they take a different tack: They go with the whole "I come in peace" approach, announcing that Sovereign was really just a bad seed and they're actually here to help everyone with their amazing technology. Meanwhile, they're accumulating forces by indoctrinating large numbers of people, or a small number of people in positions of power, or both. This would do a couple things:

 

1. It would pay off the whole "Nobody believes Shepard about the Reapers" arc that didn't have much of a resolution.

 

2. It would exploit indoctrination in an interesting way; IMO, this was one of the most poorly implemented plot devices in the series. In addition, having to fight large numbers of indoctrinated forces would have a moral weight that killing cannibals and other faceless mooks doesn't. As I've said before, the encounter with indoctrinated Salarians on Virmire should have been a preview of worse things to come.

 

3. It would enable conventional victory; if you're not going to have conventional victory, then you'll probably just end up with some kind of plot device (i.e. The Crucible! A computer virus that shuts down their shields! An exhaust port that leads directly to the main reactor!, etc.). These plot devices just generally aren't that interesting, so I don't see why a plot that requires the use of such a device should be automatically superior.

 

4. If you really wanted, you could draw connections to the Book of Revelations, with the Reapers taking the role of the false prophet or some such. Shepard is pretty much Space Jesus anyways, so why not?

[Staff Cdr Alenko]

"Our numbers will darken the sky of every world" doesn't sound like a couple hundred standard Reapers and their peons, though.

 

"Every world". Every one world, maybe. How about a dozen worlds, working together, properly united against a common enemy? Without access to the easy way of shutting down the relay network?

 

"I almost feel sorry for the Reapers".

[ImaginaryMatter]

My idea was to introduce a sort of bigger good against the Reapers. In this case, the Protheans wouldn't have been the first to strike a blow against the Reapers (just possibly the largest). That over the millions of cycles certain species and certain cycles began laying the tools and groundwork needed for the current cycle to finally defeat the Reapers. Alone their efforts weren't enough but it's up to Shepard and the galaxy to wield them. They would include things like the Prothean sabotage, ancient tech, and even a race like the Leviathan's and Thorian who managed to survive the cycles.

[dreamgazer]

"Every world". Every one world, maybe. How about a dozen worlds, working together, properly united against a common enemy? Without access to the easy way of shutting down the relay network?

 

"I almost feel sorry for the Reapers".

 

Funnily enough, the quote you've included really is an example of misguided gravitas. Scope.  

 

And, after all, they did defeat the Reapers through their unison.  They just weren't allowed to conventionally curb-stomp the mecha-Cthulhu.  

 

I do seem to recall some indoctrinated forces attempting to claim the Citadel in ME3, though.  Wonder why.

[Staff Cdr Alenko]

Funnily enough, the quote you've included really is an example of misguided gravitas. Scope.  

 

And, after all, they did defeat the Reapers through their unison.  They just weren't allowed to conventionally curb-stomp the mecha-Cthulhu.  

 

I do seem to recall some indoctrinated forces attempting to claim the Citadel in ME3, though.  Wonder why.

 

Even more funnily, you've used that quote as an example of the Reapers being numerous. Which is what I was refering to.

 

And no, they didn't. In this thing you call "ME3", Casper the Space Ghost allows you to win with Space Magic and the only thing that is actually sort of right, which is the theme of unification of various species, is reduced to numbers. Marverous.

[dreamgazer]

Even more funnily, you've used that quote as an example of the Reapers being numerous. Which is what I was refering to.

 

And no, they didn't. In this thing you call "ME3", Casper the Space Ghost allows you to win with Space Magic and the only thing that is actually sort of right, which is the theme of unification of various species, is reduced to numbers. Marverous.

 

Big difference: the Reapers have a loooooooong track record of victory.  Organics have a looooooooong track record of defeat. 

 

You're given a choice, yes, and you had to work pretty damn hard and sacrifice a lot to get there.

 

PS: The Catalyst is as responsible for the decision chamber as Vigil was for pointing you in the right direction towards the Conduit.

[Staff Cdr Alenko]

Big difference: the Reapers have a loooooooong track record of victory.  Organics have a looooooooong track record of defeat. 

 

You're given a choice, yes, and you had to work pretty damn hard and sacrifice a lot to get there.

 

PS: The Catalyst is as responsible for the decision chamber as Vigil was for pointing you in the right direction towards the Conduit.

 

Yeah, and ships going through the Omega 4 Relay had a looooooong track of not coming back. And see how that turned out.

 

That second sentence just sounded like "You have hope. More than you know". It's rubbish, it's a non-choice, and I saw no corelation between anything achieved in "ME3" and its ending.

 

And in that PS, you have compared Vigil to Casper. I am astounded.

 

EDIT: Actually, I consider the entire line of argument "No cycle has ever won before, so what makes us special" to be fundamentally wrong. It is a sci-fi epic, of course there should be a way for the protagonists to win. Saying otherwise is defeatist, inconsistent with the spirit of the previous games ("And together, we will drive them back into darkness!/insert any other positive quote here) and just outright needlessly pessimistic. Besides, in the context of this argument, how is conventional victory different from any type of victory? If the Reapers are so unbeatable, how are they going to be stopped this time around, conventionally or not? Well, they're not unbeatable. And they will be beaten. Properly.

[dreamgazer]

Yeah, and ships going through the Omega 4 Relay had a looooooong track of not coming back. And see how that turned out.

 

That second sentence just sounded like "You have hope. More than you know". It's rubbish, it's a non-choice, and I saw no corelation between anything achieved in "ME3" and its ending.

 

And in that PS, you have compared Vigil to Casper. I am astounded.

 

Again, scope.  Does the MEU simply not have to abide by any limitations?  

 

Yes, you're given a uneven choice between three (four) possibilities, and just like ME2, it's embellished with Rule of Cool. Wasn't executed the precise way I'd do it, but it is what it is.

 

And yes, both are contrived info-dump AIs who abide by their programming and aid Shepard in solving a dead-end situation by saying: "Go that way, and this happens.  Trust me."

[AlanC9]

3. It would enable conventional victory; if you're not going to have conventional victory, then you'll probably just end up with some kind of plot device (i.e. The Crucible! A computer virus that shuts down their shields! An exhaust port that leads directly to the main reactor!, etc.). These plot devices just generally aren't that interesting, so I don't see why a plot that requires the use of such a device should be automatically superior.

 

 

I believe the argument there is that we've got a game about a space marine, so any war in the game is going to end up turning on something that a space marine can do rather than on a fleet action. It's no coincidence that every one of the three games ends by Shepard going to a specific place to personally take an action.

 

Also note that the MEU space combat lore isn't set up to produce decisive space battles; they go out of their way to emphasize this.

[Staff Cdr Alenko]

Again, scope.  Does the MEU simply not have to abide by any limitations?  

 

Yes, you're given a uneven choice between three (four) possibilities, and just like ME2, it's embellished with Rule of Cool. Wasn't executed the precise way I'd do it, but it is what it is.

 

And yes, both are contrived info-dump AIs who abide by their programming and aid Shepard in solving a dead-end situation by saying: "Go that way, and this happens.  Trust me."

 

What does scope have to do with it? Scope is just another way of saying "scale". It's not the scale that matters here, it's tone. And the tone has been and is winning against all odds. Heroes have won against all odds on a smaller scale before, and they can do so on the grand one.

 

There's nothing even remotely similar between the ending to ME2 and the abomination of "ME3", which almost isn't an ending at all; it's a massive wreck.

 

And no, one is an info dump, okay, but it's not contrived, and the other is a sea of confusion.

[dreamgazer]

What does scope have to do with it? Scope is just another way of saying "scale". It's not the scale that matters here, it's tone. And the tone has been and is winning against all odds. Heroes have won against all odds on a smaller scale before, and they can do so on the grand one.

 

There's nothing even remotely similar between the ending to ME2 and the abomination of "ME3", which almost isn't an ending at all; it's a massive wreck.

 

And no, one is an info dump, okay, but it's not contrived, and the other is a sea of confusion.

 

So, you're saying that the MEU shouldn't abide by its ultimate limitations for the sake of power fantasy. Got it.  No use arguing with that. 

 

There's quite a bit of similarities between the two endings, actually: technobabble hog-swill involving organic-synthetic energies and essence, a surprise twist along with the reveal of an out-of-nowhere nonsense "character", and a moderately-interesting decision slathered in heavy-handed bollocks and flawed writing.

 

And yes, both AIs are contrived as hell: a magically still-active and conveniently-placed Vigil unleashes a load of bizarre crap about the Reapers and relays that Shepard eats up with a spoon, then trusts as it shoots through a teleporter "prototype mass relay".

[Iakus]

So, you're saying that the MEU shouldn't abide by its ultimate limitations for the sake of power fantasy. Got it.  No use arguing with that. 

 

 

I love how the desire for a clear win against the Reapers is dismissed as a "power fantasy" like it's something to sneer at.

[Staff Cdr Alenko]

So, you're saying that the MEU shouldn't abide by its ultimate limitations for the sake of power fantasy. Got it.  No use arguing with that. 

 

There's quite a bit of similarities between the two endings, actually: technobabble hog-swill involving organic-synthetic energies and essence, a surprise twist along with the reveal of an out-of-nowhere nonsense "character", and a moderately-interesting decision slathered in heavy-handed bollocks and flawed writing.

 

And yes, both AIs are contrived as hell: a magically still-active and conveniently-placed Vigil unleashes a load of bizarre crap about the Reapers and relays that Shepard eats up with a spoon, then trusts as it shoots through a teleporter "prototype mass relay".

 

No, I'm not saying that. I'm saying that a foe that is unbeatable doesn't work in stories. What would Star Wars be like if The Empire was unbeatable at the end? What would LotR be like if Sauron was impossible to defeat? Et cetera.

 

As for the power fantasy bit, ME is a power fantasy. If you define power fantasy as a story that actually has a satisfactory outcome. If that's the case, then so are the stories I've just mentioned. So are Back to the Future and Indiana Jones films, so's Deus Ex and so's almost every other video game (not all, granted). And there is nothing wrong with that.

 

As for the endings, clearly something sets them apart because I don't remember ME1's or ME2's ending to cause a massive rage that launched a million angry posts, poetically speaking.

[Eryri]

I love how the desire for a clear win against the Reapers is dismissed as a "power fantasy" like it's something to sneer at.

Indeed. Particularly when the endings apparently let us wipe out a whole category of being at a whim, become God Emperor, or incorporate our "essence" into everything. That would seem to me to be far more of a power fantasy.

Plus, if being a power fantasy is a fault then it's one that a vast number of RPGs are guilty of. Unless one assiduously refrains from ever spending points when levelling up to keep one's character as weak as possible.

[dreamgazer]

I love how the desire for a clear win against the Reapers is dismissed as a "power fantasy" like it's something to sneer at.

 

If you're at all interested in the plot, yeah. 

[Staff Cdr Alenko]

If you're at all interested in the plot, yeah. 

 

So "being interested in the plot" equals being a defeatist and accepting that the foe is too strong to possible be able to best him. Right.

[dreamgazer]

So "being interested in the plot" equals being a defeatist and accepting that the foe is too strong to possible be able to best him. Right.

 

Being a realist doesn't mean being a defeatist, and it's important to understand one's limitations. 

[Staff Cdr Alenko]

Being a realist doesn't mean being a defeatist, and it's important to understand one's limitations. 

 

Well it's realistic and well within limitations to expect to defeat the powerful evil enemy in a sci-fi game.

[AlanC9]

No, I'm not saying that. I'm saying that a foe that is unbeatable doesn't work in stories. What would Star Wars be like if The Empire was unbeatable at the end? What would LotR be like if Sauron was impossible to defeat? Et cetera.

 

 

 

Wait... what does this have to do with ME3, again? The Reapers lost, just like Sauron.

[dreamgazer]

Well it's realistic and well within limitations to expect to defeat the powerful evil enemy in a sci-fi game.

 

Thankfully, you did!

[Staff Cdr Alenko]

Wait... what does this have to do with ME3, again? The Reapers lost, just like Sauron.

 

This is a discussion about a victory which does not involve space magic.

 

 

Thankfully, you did!

 

Or it was.

 

I didn't. Look above:

 

Even more funnily, you've used that quote as an example of the Reapers being numerous. Which is what I was refering to.

 

And no, they didn't. In this thing you call "ME3", Casper the Space Ghost allows you to win with Space Magic and the only thing that is actually sort of right, which is the theme of unification of various species, is reduced to numbers. Marverous.

[AlanC9]

I love how the desire for a clear win against the Reapers is dismissed as a "power fantasy" like it's something to sneer at.

 

What do you mean by "clear win"? There's no ambiguity about the Reapers being destroyed in Destroy or reprogrammed in Control.

[AlanC9]

This is a discussion about a victory which does not involve space magic.

 

 

So how come you mentioned Sauron? He not only couldn't be defeated without magic, he wasn't.

[dreamgazer]

This is a discussion about a victory which does not involve space magic.

 

 

Meh.  Don't choose Synthesis. 

[Iakus]

What do you mean by "clear win"? There's no ambiguity about the Reapers being destroyed in Destroy or reprogrammed in Control.

 

At far too high a price, for many.  But there's enough threads about that