485 réponses à ce sujet

[Mordokai]

No they wouldn't, no race would let itself be destroyed when there are other options that allow it to live. To think otherwise is the height of delusion. 

 

I can live with that.

[AlanC9]

this is true. But Bioware made it abundantly clear that Refuse is "You Chose Wrong" (akin to the Spirit Monk choosing to join Master Li in Jade Empire) I could almost hear them flipping the table in a fit of pique as the Catalyst goes "SO BE IT!!!"
.

But that's simply the situation. Refuse = extermination.

[Iakus]

But that's simply the situation. Refuse = extermination.

 

Refuse= Yank the Dog's Chain

 

Actually, the entire ending is.  Refuse is just the most blatant example.

[Reorte]

But how is being able to make a futile attempt any different from not being able to make a futile attempt? RP-wise, I mean, since obviously the results are the same in both cases.

RP-wise your character doesn't know the result is the same even though the player does (due to metagaming or from guessing that the game might not have bothered giving you the option if it was doable).

 

Ethically speaking Destroy vs. Control could've been a better one if better presented - loss of the geth (more general losses would've made more sense though) and certainty of victory vs. no immediate loss but a danger of it going ****** up in the future.

[Eryri]

Refuse= Yank the Dog's Chain

Actually, the entire ending is. Refuse is just the most blatant example.

While Alan is correct that Refuse leading to disaster is consistent with the rest of the game, that doesn't let the writers off the hook. It's just another reason why the beginning of ME3 is so flawed. Letting hordes of reapers back into the galaxy so soon was a bad decision for the story. If I had to hazard a guess it was "rule of cool" trumping narrative logic for the sake of the Michael Bay-esque spectacle of Reapers stomping future Vancouver.

The speed of the Reaper's arrival directly contradicts Sovereign's desperation in ME1, makes Harbinger's remote construction of the Human Reaper in ME2 seem pointless, and basically negates everything Shepard (and we) achieved in those two games by forcing the galaxy to sit on their hands for months instead of preparing. A perfectly good, dramatic story could have been told about a realistically beatable scouting party of Reapers trying to warp in their comrades from darkspace, or by setting the invasion a decade or two later after the galaxy had built their own armada of warships. As a cyborg Shepard could be fighting fit for years. I'm starting to dislike the beginning of the game as much as the ending. Setting up the invasion as so overwhelming was bound to lead to nonsense like the crucible, with hindsight.

[Reorte]

Although the timescale was totally screwed up largely the same issues would've applied no matter when the Reapers turned up. The fact that they've been around for so long makes it highly implausible that they would be beaten at all - "this cycle is different / special" is unconvincing at best. A bit of a retcon so there had only been a small number (say a dozen at best) and I'd be able to swallow the Reapers being beatable, put anything else down to Sovereign being full of himself and TIM getting his numbers confused (which he seems to have done anyway).

[General TSAR]

I wouldn't say "amazingly" or "high" or "replay value."

 

I only play it again to finish my ME1 and ME2 choices, beyond that super meh. 

[Hadeedak]

Well, yeah.

 

I mean, I'd say the replay value is quite high. But I also play it primarily to finish my ME1 and ME2 choices.

 

Cause. You know. Trilogy.

[dreamgazer]

The speed of the Reaper's arrival directly contradicts Sovereign's desperation in ME1, makes Harbinger's remote construction of the Human Reaper in ME2 seem pointless, and basically negates everything Shepard (and we) achieved in those two games by forcing the galaxy to sit on their hands for months instead of preparing. A perfectly good, dramatic story could have been told about a realistically beatable scouting party of Reapers trying to warp in their comrades from darkspace, or by setting the invasion a decade or two later after the galaxy had built their own armada of warships. As a cyborg Shepard could be fighting fit for years. I'm starting to dislike the beginning of the game as much as the ending. Setting up the invasion as so overwhelming was bound to lead to nonsense like the crucible, with hindsight.

 

Why does it contradict Sovereign's plot in ME1? A sneak attack is still preferable to destructive stampeding, but only if the secrecy is preserved.  The Reapers have no reason to think that the galaxy wouldn't be ready for their attack at that point, and their rapid brute-force and shock and awe is a relatively effective secondary tactic in how it shakes the morale of the enemy.  It's messy, though, since the Reapers aren't entirely invincible and do have valuable resources to lose. 

 

Why does it make Harbinger's remote construction seem pointless? They're still building an intricate machine that can't be disrupted by external forces.

 

As for the six-month stall, it's basically in keeping with the ignorance displayed by the galaxy in ME2 when they were given two years to prepare and ultimately arrived at "Ah yes, Reapers", despite the ending of ME1.  That wasted jump in time at the beginning of ME2 bothers me far more than the six-month extension leading into ME3.

 

I also strongly doubt the Reapers would wait a decade or two after Sovereign and Harbinger had both been thwarted by this cycle's forces, conveniently allowing them more time to get ready.

[dreamgazer]

Refuse= Yank the Dog's Chain

 

Actually, the entire ending is.  Refuse is just the most blatant example.

 

Only problem, of course, is that the main character does accomplish their goal in the other three endings: stopping the Reaper harvest by building and using the Crucible.   It's obvious what'll happen if Shepard folds his/her arms and stubbornly refuses to use said device. 

 

It just looks different in each, depending on what you pick and where your philosophy lies (and how much stretching of lore you can stomach). 

[Iakus]

I wouldn't say "amazingly" or "high" or "replay value."

 

I only play it again to finish my ME1 and ME2 choices, beyond that super meh. 

 

I actually have not been able to do a trilogy run since ME3 was released.

[Iakus]

Only problem, of course, is that the main character does accomplish their goal in the other three endings: stopping the Reaper harvest by building and using the Crucible.   It's obvious what'll happen if Shepard folds his/her arms and stubbornly refuses to use said device. 

 

It just looks different in each, depending on what you pick and where your philosophy lies (and how much stretching of lore you can stomach). 

 

That's Leviathan logic "There was no mistake, it still serves its purpose"

 

How it's done matters, too.

[dreamgazer]

That's Leviathan logic "There was no mistake, it still serves its purpose"

 

How it's done matters, too.

 

Indeed, this is how they chose to end the trilogy, and it beats being done by way of choosing whether to sacrifice humanity or extinction and making Shepard a more literal villain against the galaxy (and more good-guy Reapers), let alone a straightforward conventional / "military" / whatever victory against the repeatedly-successful, vastly experienced, million-year-old, miles-high death machines. 

[Iakus]

Indeed, this is how they chose to end the trilogy, and it beats being done by way of choosing whether to sacrifice humanity or extinction and making Shepard a more literal villain against the galaxy (and more good-guy Reapers), let alone a straightforward conventional / "military" / whatever victory against the repeatedly-successful, vastly experienced, million-year-old, miles-high death machines. 

 

Yeah, clear wins are so passe

[dreamgazer]

Yeah, clear wins are so passe

 

Depends on the context of the story. For this one, yes, that kind of "clear win" would have been ridiculous. 

[spirosz]

Vanilla had no replay value for me personally.  Citadel DLC (and the DLC in general) brought aspects to certains arcs of characters to an extent that made the story more enjoyable for me personally.  I should state that l haven't played through it a second time, but I've watched the DLC footage on Youtube and at least for what matters to me, it made it seem like it would be a more enjoyable experience.  Although, I won't know till I ever actually venture back into that series, where I've played the first two about 30 times and the third game one time. 

[Iakus]

Depends on the context of the story. For this one, yes, that kind of "clear win" would have been ridiculous. 

Was it ridiculous in the first two games?

[dreamgazer]

Was it ridiculous in the first two games?

 

You mean the first game that stopped the near-invincible extermination squad's preliminary tactic, and the second game that dealt with their small-scale, humanoid proxy? Neither of those were the Reapers, the "darken the sky" antagonists kept at the distance who were responsible for wiping out countless cycles.

[spirosz]

^

[Eryri]

Why does it contradict Sovereign's plot in ME1? A sneak attack is still preferable to destructive stampeding, but only if the secrecy is preserved. The Reapers have no reason to think that the galaxy wouldn't be ready for their attack at that point, and their rapid brute-force and shock and awe is a relatively effective secondary tactic in how it shakes the morale of the enemy. It's messy, though, since the Reapers aren't entirely invincible and do have valuable resources to lose.

But if Sovereign had only waited three short years, he could have launched that surprise attack on the Citadel with the entire Reaper armada at his back, rather than the relatively puny forces of the Heretic Geth. The Reapers can't be tracked while travelling FTL, so they would still have had the element of surprise flying in the long way from Darkspace - and Sovereign could have captured the Citadel with far less risk to himself. The only way his desperation would have made sense would be if the Reapers really were a vast distance away, and would have to expend considerable resources in getting back to the galaxy.

Why does it make Harbinger's remote construction seem pointless? They're still building an intricate machine that can't be disrupted by external forces.

To me, there seems little point in Harbinger scraping together enough humans to make a Reaper from out in the boondocks, when he planned to invade Earth itself in a matter of months. He only risked exposing and wasting the Collectors when he could have kept them in reserve for the invasion. Again, the premature construction of the Human Reaper might have made sense if the Reapers really were trapped, and wanted the HR to make another assault on the Citadel to open the relay. But as of ME3 it makes very little.

As for the six-month stall, it's basically in keeping with the ignorance displayed by the galaxy in ME2 when they were given two years to prepare and ultimately arrived at "Ah yes, Reapers", despite the ending of ME1. That wasted jump in time at the beginning of ME2 bothers me far more than the six-month extension leading into ME3.

I also strongly doubt the Reapers would wait a decade or two after Sovereign and Harbinger had both been thwarted by this cycle's forces, conveniently allowing them more time to get ready.

My hypothetical scenario was that the Reapers would have been forced to take decades to get back from Darkspace due to its extreme distance, rather than deliberately waiting.

[Iakus]

You mean the first game that stopped the near-invincible extermination squad's preliminary tactic, and the second game that dealt with their small-scale, humanoid proxy? Neither of those were the Reapers, the "darken the sky" antagonists kept at the distance who were responsible for wiping out countless cycles.

 

 

Yes, those.

[AlanC9]

Refuse= Yank the Dog's Chain

 

Actually, the entire ending is.  Refuse is just the most blatant example.

 

Not a great example of the trope. But even if it were, what of it? Half of my favorite shows are in that trope list.

[Dabrikishaw]

Is this another discussion that basically amounts to "My taste in series endings is superior to yours!" from both sides again?

[Rainbowhawk]

I've played through the Trilogy three times and I'm currently doing a New game+ on ME3 with my third Completed Shepard. I've always did John Shepard and Liara Romance and I've made most of the same choices (After leaving behind both Kaidan and Ashley on separate playthroughs, I've decided to stick with Kaidan from here on). And one every playthrough I've found several things that I missed and I even missed something on my current playthrough which is Conrad's encounter and his paper on Dark energy dissertation. In playthroughs 2 and 3 I talk encounter Conrad after I fix the Sabotage of the medi-gel dispensers but not before so I missed a war asset there. Also I now know who to support walking around on the Citadel to get the Max war assets there.

 

The next time I playthrough the trilogy, I'll finally play FemShep and Romance Kaidan then Garrus in 2 & 3.

[AlanC9]

Is this another discussion that basically amounts to "My taste in series endings is superior to yours!" from both sides again?

It's what we do.