702 réponses à ce sujet

[Farangbaa]

The Shadow Broker knew about it too. The Yahg one.

 

Oh... that's a bad first post of the page. He knew about the Crucible.

[dreamgazer]

The Shadow Broker knew about it too. The Yahg one.

 

Oh... that's a bad first post of the page. He knew about the Crucible.

 

Yeah, but that was in post-ME2 DLC, and Mac was probably already cooking up ideas for 3.

[Hadeedak]

If I was going to 'fix' Mass Effect 3, I'd start with Hackett not saying Shepard is crucial to his plans. There's no bloody reason why. The things you do could be done by most anyone else. It's not like you're leading armies or anything. You're doing small strike operations and evac. The major exceptions being when you're required to diplomacy, but... 

 

I dunno, it just felt like player-ego pandering. I'm with the clone. Shepard's a good soldier who gets lucky and is in the right place at the right time. Also, fairly charismatic

 

I'd also boot out or reduce the Citadel coup to a smaller assassination attempt with largely cloaked enemies, maybe take out the N7 missions and saving the downed quarian admiral on Rannoch... And I'd use those resources for a longer, more involved Priority: Earth, with some losses dependent on EMS and choices. Stab a few beloved characters for pathos. As dumb as the DA2 end fight where EVERYONE was involved was, I wouldn't be against that on a larger scale. Maybe with a few suicide mission choices. 

 

Priority: Earth could have standed to be more involved. And we should have been reminded of the rogue AIs that kept popping up in ME1 and ME2 sporadically. Especially the casino AI in ME1 which pretty much verbatim says what the Reapers claim AI will always say.

[Staff Cdr Alenko]

Coordination, and a hub of operations.  Citadel has many functions. 

 

And between the Protheans' scientific prowess and Anderson mentioning that the Conduit might be some kind of "super weapon", I wouldn't say it was entirely out of the cards (among many, as Drew K. has stated) from the very beginning. 

 

Okay, I don't remember the Citadel to be the hub of operations for the construction of the Crucible in "ME3" But then again, I only played it once before throwing it into the ocean.

 

As for the second part - writers having multiple ideas from the beginning does not constitute any pre-"ME3" foreshadowing of the Crucible. Of which there isn't any.

 

 

The Shadow Broker knew about it too. The Yahg one.

 

Oh... that's a bad first post of the page. He knew about the Crucible.

 

Where in LotSB is there a mention of this contraption?

[dreamgazer]

Okay, I don't remember the Citadel to be the hub of operations for the construction of the Crucible in "ME3" But then again, I only played it once before throwing it into the ocean.

 

As for the second part - writers having multiple ideas from the beginning does not constitute any pre-"ME3" foreshadowing of the Crucible. Of which there isn't any.

 

Lots of things happen in the Citadel, from deciding to go forward with the Citadel's construction to housing refugees, building up troops, and coordinating raw materials.

 

For the Crucible specifically? Perhaps not, but seeds are planted for the implementation of a super-weapon, as well as the fundamentals of the tech it utilizes.

[Hadeedak]

...Wait. You played ME3 ONCE, decided it was terrible forever, and haven't stopped complaining since?

 

I would suggest giving it another shot. For realsie. It's not a resounding narrative for our time or all time, but it's pretty fun and interesting. And it has a lot of surprises and nice little touches that charm me.

[Staff Cdr Alenko]

Lots of things happen in the Citadel, from deciding to go forward with the Citadel's construction to housing refugees, building up troops, and coordinating raw materials.

 

For the Crucible specifically? Perhaps not, but seeds are planted for the implementation of a super-weapon, as well as the fundamentals of the tech it utilizes.

 

Okay, right now you are saying that having won back in ME1 allows us to build the Crucible. And I'm saying the Crucible is an asinine plot device that should have never existed.

 

As for LotSB, what seeds are you talking about? Do you mean that tiny mention of the Shadow Broker studying Protheans, and Liara thinking he knew something that still eludes us? Because if I remember correctly, that's all there was. And that could be about literally everything.

 

 

...Wait. You played ME3 ONCE, decided it was terrible forever, and haven't stopped complaining since?

 

I would suggest giving it another shot. For realsie. It's not a resounding narrative for our time or all time, but it's pretty fun and interesting. And it has a lot of surprises and nice little touches that charm me.

 

Thanks but no thanks. Like I said, ME3 hasn't come out yet. And if you're refering to "ME3" then it got the treatment it deserved:

 

[AlanC9]

...Wait. You played ME3 ONCE, decided it was terrible forever, and haven't stopped complaining since?

That's not strictly true. He stopped complaining for quite a few months.

[themikefest]

Okay, I don't remember the Citadel to be the hub of operations for the construction of the Crucible in "ME3" But then again, I only played it once before throwing it into the ocean.

 

Which ocean did you throw it into?

 

Was there any parts to ME3 that you did like?

[Hadeedak]

'Fair nuff. I will say I think you're being a trifle unfair to what's actually a decent game. And that one round a year or two back is not ideal to base your perceptions on.

[dreamgazer]

Okay, right now you are saying that having won back in ME1 allows us to build the Crucible. And I'm saying the Crucible is an asinine plot device that should have never existed.

 

As for LotSB, what seeds are you talking about? Do you mean that tiny mention of the Shadow Broker studying Protheans, and Liara thinking he knew something that still eludes us? Because if I remember correctly, that's all there was. And that could be about literally everything.

 

Protecting the Citadel ultimately opened up venues for victory, period. And I'm in the camp that believe a conventional or semi-conventional victory against the Reapers is far more asinine than constructing a device like the Crucible based on blueprints discovered from the mythical Prothean cycle.  

 

Introduce the blueprint more organically and openly discuss its functions, chop away or drastically restructure "Synthesis" (if you must keep it), have Avina as the info-dump AI (no, not someone dead who'd manipulate Shepard further), and point-blank cover why indoctrination isn't a thing ... and I wouldn't have had any issues with the Crucible, really.  Despite its flaws, however, I'll take what's there instead of: "F----- YEAH, GALAXY!"

[Staff Cdr Alenko]

'Fair nuff. I will say I think you're being a trifle unfair to what's actually a decent game. And that one round a year or two back is not ideal to base your perceptions on.

 

Maybe, but apart from the game itself, my reservations also stem from BioWare's treatment of the fan response. I've posted about this in another thread not that long ago. Besides, I really don't feel like accepting space magic. I like Mass Effect too much.

 

 

Protecting the Citadel ultimately opened up venues for victory, period. And I'm in the camp that believe a conventional or semi-conventional victory against the Reapers is far more asinine than constructing a device like the Crucible based on blueprints discovered from the mythical Prothean cycle.  

 

Introduce the blueprint more organically and openly discuss its functions, chop away or drastically restructure "Synthesis" (if you must keep it), have Avina as the info-dump AI (no, not someone dead who'd manipulate Shepard further), and point-blank cover why indoctrination isn't a thing ... and I wouldn't have had any issues with the Crucible, really.  Despite its flaws, however, I'll take what's there instead of: "F----- YEAH, GALAXY!"

 

 

Well I'm in the opposite camp, needless to say. I do not consider this "ending" salvageable.

 

And you didn't answer my LotSB question (don't mean to be rude with that sentence, just genuinely curious).

[Iakus]

Protecting the Citadel ultimately opened up venues for victory, period. And I'm in the camp that believe a conventional or semi-conventional victory against the Reapers is far more asinine than constructing a device like the Crucible based on blueprints discovered from the mythical Prothean cycle.  

 

Introduce the blueprint more organically and openly discuss its functions, chop away or drastically restructure "Synthesis" (if you must keep it), have Avina as the info-dump AI (no, not someone dead who'd manipulate Shepard further), and point-blank cover why indoctrination isn't a thing ... and I wouldn't have had any issues with the Crucible, really.  Despite its flaws, however, I'll take what's there instead of: "F----- YEAH, GALAXY!"

 

Why is any victory that doesn't involve a MacGuffin or a Deus ex Machina dismissed as "conventional"?

 

Conventional =/= "Headlong charge into the teeth of the enemy"

[dreamgazer]

Maybe, but apart from the game itself, my reservations also stem from BioWare's treatment of the fan response. I've posted about this in another thread not that long ago. Besides, I really don't feel like accepting space magic. I like Mass Effect too much.

 

You accepted space magic in the first and second game, though.

 

 

Why is any victory that doesn't involve a Maguffin or a Deus ex Machina dismissed as "conventional"?

 

"Conventional =/= "Headlong charge into the teeth of the enemy"

 

Because orchestrating even semi-conventional tactics would imply that the Reapers, age-old and (purportedly) highly-sophisticated killing machines, wouldn't be able to adapt to them.

[MassivelyEffective0730]

Why is any victory that doesn't involve a MacGuffin or a Deus ex Machina dismissed as "conventional"?

 

Conventional =/= "Headlong charge into the teeth of the enemy"

 

I'll say this: any victory that doesn't require some kind of super-weapon is going to be poor. Worse than what we got from a narrative standpoint, because it defies what the Reapers are. The alternative is still pretty bad, but that's just a testament to the narrative quandaries BW put themselves into making the series. The Reapers are literally too powerful to have any kind of victory against them that isn't a tremendous pull.

[AlanC9]

I think it could work. ME is supposedly a story based game, the player has more than one way to interact with the story other than shooting at things and that method would be to let the consequences of Shepard's decisions do some of the heavy lifting. For the final mission give Shepard some important ground based mission to do while the fleets over head blast the Reapers into scrap metal.

How is doing it this way any different from what we got? Shepard's decisions determine EMS, EMS governs ending results, Shepard shoots stuff on the ground during a space battle, etc.

For that matter, how do we contrive a decisive final battle? Although if Star Wars (films, that is) can handwave that, I guess ME could too.

And this is leaving out the massive Reaper nerf, but I suppose we can just assume that's integral to the concept.

[Iakus]

I'll say this: any victory that doesn't require some kind of super-weapon is going to be poor. Worse than what we got from a narrative standpoint, because it defies what the Reapers are. The alternative is still pretty bad, but that's just a testament to the narrative quandaries BW put themselves into making the series. The Reapers are literally too powerful to have any kind of victory against them that isn't a tremendous pull.

 

It wouldn't have to be a super-weapon.  Just an unexpected weapon.

 

The galaxy has developed along the lines the Reapers allowed.  Blinding them to other paths.

 

So, find one of these other paths.  Develop weapons or strategies the Reapers didn't plan for.  

 

No defense is proof against everything.  No plan takes everything into account.

[Iakus]

How is doing it this way any different from what we got? Shepard's decisions determine EMS, EMS governs ending results, Shepard shoots stuff on the ground during a space battle, etc.

For that matter, how do we contrive a decisive final battle? Although if Star Wars (films, that is) can handwave that, I guess ME could too

EMS is nothing more than a number.  In the end it doesn't matter what resources you have gathered.  It doesn't matter if you got the krogan on board, the salarians, or both, or neither.  

 

Rachni engineers don't make the Crucible operate any differently (so much for each race contributing to refining it)

 

Here's wondering how DAI will handle uniting different factions

[AlanC9]

Other paths? Something that the hundreds and hundreds of previous cycles never thought of?

[MassivelyEffective0730]

You accepted space magic in the first and second game, though.

 

 

 

Because orchestrating even semi-conventional tactics would imply that the Reapers, age-old and (purportedly) highly-sophisticated killing machines, wouldn't be able to adapt to them.

 

1) I'd say that there's a certain-level going into this of the suspension of disbelief. For me (and most others it seems), ME1 and ME2 were able to hold onto this while ME3 was not. That's where we're (you and I) going to differ. To you the entire trilogy had narrative flaws and each game was guilty of flaws and the series was inherently cracked, so to speak. While I don't necessarily disagree with this sentiment, I do feel that most of the problems came to breach with ME3. I do believe ME3 is the offending title here that takes the flaws of the franchise to a higher level, and, unlike you (and I'm not being a jerkass about it), I think ME3 alone is the cause of that. Not ME2 or ME1. IMO, ME3 is responsible for its own flaws, not built on the ones brought up in the other two titles. It's why I hold ME1 and especially ME2 on a higher pedestal than ME3.

[AlanC9]

Here's wondering how DAI will handle uniting different factions

Probably the way DAO did.

[Iakus]

Other paths? Something that the hundreds and hundreds of previous cycles never thought of?

 

Why not?

 

Playing as one of the other cycles would be pretty boring, wouldn't it?

 

Edit:  Actually, foiling Sovereign already does something the previous cycles never had:  forewarning of the Reapers.

 

Too bad that got urinated away in ME2

[Hadeedak]

The last thing the series needs is more 'humans are special'.

[AlanC9]

Why not?
 
Playing as one of the other cycles would be pretty boring, wouldn't it?

You're either missing the point or ducking it. How is it that nobody else ever came up with the new wonder weapon?

[MassivelyEffective0730]

It wouldn't have to be a super-weapon.  Just an unexpected weapon.

 

The galaxy has developed along the lines the Reapers allowed.  Blinding them to other paths.

 

So, find one of these other paths.  Develop weapons or strategies the Reapers didn't plan for.  

 

No defense is proof against everything.  No plan takes everything into account.

 

To be frank, that's poor writing and a poor idea. 

 

The Reapers are sufficiently advanced enough, and we sufficiently unsophisticated enough, that no plan or path would be effective in any way. There are no weapons or strategies that we could use that the Reapers wouldn't immediately and overwhelmingly counter. 

 

While true about the defense, what is also true is that we also don't have everything. Anything that can get through their defenses is far beyond our technology and capability. For all intents and purposes, they are nearly invincible to what we have at our disposal beyond a super weapon. The only thing the Reapers can't take into account is a super weapon. That's your plan.