I didn't say it was one either. I really would say MacGuffin works best, even if you can't really describe what kind of plot device the Crucible is.
That or Chekov's Gun since even though we know its supposed to kill Reapers, the means isnt known by anyone so it is generally treated as if it is a seemingly pointless thing.
1) That was an entirely optional mission, and dark energy is hardly mentioned aside from that.
2) I'd do a little reading on Drew K.'s original dark energy idea for the ending, which made Shepard into the series' true antagonist, made the Reapers literal good guys, and demanded either a sacrifice of humanity or to send organic life towards a likely extinction. And it still involved "techno-space magic" ( his words, not mine) and a DEM-like decision.
3) ME2 left the narrative with limited options in terms of how to credibly defeat the Reapers.
1) Then I wouldn't have made it optional, but required to progress in the game. After all, it's Tali's facking recruitment mission. It's not like it's Rupert Gardner's one..
2) ...wtf?
3) It's not like Bioware aren't adept to fill plot holes. As I said, making Tali's recruitment canon, even if someone didn't do it, and then developing the story from that point should have been relatively easy. Heck, I've already seen WAY worse filled plot holes (Geth VI....ahem, ahem...AKA, "Let's trust that newfound Geth, even if I sold Legion to Cerberus/never knew him and literally until that moment I only thought of Geth as enemies!").
99% with you on that one. The first and last time I was had an account on message boards was during junior high, and I gave them up ever since because I could not deal with how people act like freaking infants online. Been on these boards for like a month and I'm disappointed to have been reminded the hard way what a crap nest places like this can be for overgrown children who take their frustration on video game discussion. Like what the hell.
To be fair, there are boards out there that are deadly serious, at least with respecting people and mod creators. The Bethesda forums are an example of that.
The Reapers would have still eaten you alive if it was.
I thought it was going to be some sort of Dark Matter weapon that used the relays to target the Reapers with a wave of Dark Energy that caused the Reapers to implode on themselves or something. I was sort of right. I was also expecting some sort of finale similar to DA:O, where you have one ending, but different variations of that ending.
I thought it would reverse indoctrination, and make the Reapers lower their barriers and stand still for a whoopin'. I think that's kind of the theory behind the leviathan's ability to take out a reaper, and it was the only (somewhat logical) way I could see to "win."
I suppose the blue flavor did capture some of that in concept, although the Gary Stu Shepard digital reaper god thing made it silly (in my opinion.) Red would have been there if it had been limited to Reapers, but when you universalise it and apply the effect to anything more complex than a toaster oven it too goes headfirst into the deep end of the silly pool.
I think, more than anything, that's my biggest turn-off regarding the ending. Instead of a limited effect that turned one of the Reaper's strengths into a weakness and made them vulnerable, the Crucible empowered and the Catalyst demanded that Shepard Almighty rewrite the galaxy in one of the three color coded images that were presented. It was simply too far, too much, too silly even for a sci-fi/fantasy game.
I thought it would reverse indoctrination, and make the Reapers lower their barriers and stand still for a whoopin'. I think that's kind of the theory behind the leviathan's ability to take out a reaper, and it was the only (somewhat logical) way I could see to "win."
Didn't buy that the virus would work against the aliens in Independence Day, and I really can't buy that the million-year-old Reapers couldn't react to that kind of stun technology in Mass Effect. I could see the tactic working against some of the Reapers, maybe, during that downtime. But all, or even more than half? In my opinion, that's a bit more preposterous than a Heavy Overload wave that can't discern between types of Reaper-infused synthetics.
Didn't buy that the virus would work against the aliens in Independence Day, and I really can't buy that the million-year-old Reapers couldn't react to that kind of stun technology in Mass Effect. I could see the tactic working against some of the Reapers, maybe, during that downtime. But all, or even more than half? In my opinion, that's a bit more preposterous than a Heavy Overload wave that can't discern between types of Reaper-infused synthetics.
Then again, I never bought that ME's plot should be taken more seriously than Independence Day's to begin with.
Then again, I never bought that ME's plot should be taken more seriously than Independence Day's to begin with.
ID4's plot was just a teensy bit more plausible, since we weren't dealing with ancient kill machines, just some space locusts.
Didn't buy that the virus would work against the aliens in Independence Day...
You doubt the power of the Powerbook??
Then again, I never bought that ME's plot should be taken more seriously than Independence Day's to begin with.
Eh, I've always been able to take ME a bit more seriously than a disaster blockbuster by Roland Emmerich. The Reaper threat was much larger and more bound by space-fantasy, sure, but the storytelling largely keeps its feet on the ground about organic life's limitations and actually touched on themes of technological advancement and the political and societal resistance to impending threats.
Not by much, but enough.
Then again, I never bought that ME's plot should be taken more seriously than Independence Day's to begin with.
Plots are never serious serious. That's not what is supposed to be serious. Verhoeven's Robocop hasn't got a serious plot, but the writing is brilliant and turn the movie into an intellectual one. Mass Effect is written this way.
I find it's the other things around the main plot of Mass Effect that I found easier to take seriously. The reaper threat was more like a binding agent to keep all that other stuff together. In and of itself, the reaper cycle thing became pretty ridiculous, at least when the Collectors made the scene, and we learn that the reapers are actually the biggest macabre erector set in the universe. I always thought the ending took itself a bit too seriously. Like, laugh clown, laugh, for Maker's sake.
I find it's the other things around the main plot of Mass Effect that I found easier to take seriously. The reaper threat was more like a binding agent to keep all that other stuff together. In and of itself, the reaper cycle thing became pretty ridiculous, at least when the Collectors made the scene, and we learn that the reapers are actually the biggest macabre erector set in the universe. I always thought the ending took itself a bit too seriously. Like, laugh clown, laugh, for Maker's sake.
Perhaps, but the Ascension decision and the Collector Base decision were both posed as serious moments in the narrative, the first of which claims a noteworthy number of lives no matter how you shake it. And the story has always operated around the Reaper harvest as an ominous and impending thing, with the occasional zinger about defeating them.
People need a place to vent, doesn't matter if it's 2 years later. I honestly think the ME3 ending discussion will finally drop to the barest minimum once ME4 is released. Until then there's no problem at all with people who still like to discuss it.
I dunno, while the ME2 forum is pretty dead, we discuss ME2 issues here all the time. I imagine it will be the same once we have the new Mass Effect to discuss, especially because of the extreme likelihood of at least call backs to ME3,
Then again, I never bought that ME's plot should be taken more seriously than Independence Day's to begin with.
Neither did I, 90% of video game plots suck, so my expectations were low, but I still hoped Bioware would surprise me, but alas, it did not happen.
There were too many writers involved in the story, all with their own interpretations of different events and characters, which led to a lot of inconsistencies over the course of the trilogy.
Eh, I've always been able to take ME a bit more seriously than a disaster blockbuster by Roland Emmerich. The Reaper threat was much larger and more bound by space-fantasy, sure, but the storytelling largely keeps its feet on the ground about organic life's limitations and actually touched on themes of technological advancement and the political and societal resistance to impending threats.
Not by much, but enough.
I suppose it's just my personal preference to never take Bioware plots seriously, since they've always disappointed me in the past. It's all characters and gameplay for me.
99% with you on that one. The first and last time I was had an account on message boards was during junior high, and I gave them up ever since because I could not deal with how people act like freaking infants online. Been on these boards for like a month and I'm disappointed to have been reminded the hard way what a crap nest places like this can be for overgrown children who take their frustration on video game discussion. Like what the hell.
On topic: In my first playthrough of ME3, which a was a couple of weeks ago, I played the Citadel DLC right when my Shep was ready to do the Cerberus base mish. I haven't touched it since lol. I don't really want to go through with the endings.
I've seen enough vids to see what its about and I'm kind of alright with just leaving my Shep chillin in the DLC, perpetually with her squadmates and the arena mini game at her disposal. I'm sure many of you said something similar, but Citadel DLC feels like the real ending.
I'm on my second, and most likely my last playtrhough of ME and I'm probably jsut going to leave it at the Citadel DLC too haha. **** that star child. No thx
Actually since the move to these new forums the level of respect and decorum has risen enormously. Sure, there's the odd troll but it used to be waaaaaay worse. The people still here carry the scars of battles long fought, there's a certain level of humorous resignation when the old topics rear up yet again, not rage filled passions anymore.
ID4's plot was just a teensy bit more plausible, since we weren't dealing with ancient kill machines, just some space locusts.
Actually given the vastness of the Universe, I think it's safe to assume that there are some ancient kill-bots out there somewhere, hopefully not in our galaxy. Or worse yet, a grey goo apocalypse eating up the universe. Read up on Von Neumann probes and their variations. Something Reaper-like out there is pretty much a 100% certainty.
Then again, I never bought that ME's plot should be taken more seriously than Independence Day's to begin with.
That's the best way to enjoy it. The characters, settings and teh feels all make it a great ride.
Perhaps, but the Ascension decision and the Collector Base decision were both posed as serious moments in the narrative, the first of which claims a noteworthy number of lives no matter how you shake it. And the story has always operated around the Reaper harvest as an ominous and impending thing, with the occasional zinger about defeating them.
I look at this pretty much the same way I look at Dragon Age: Origins. On one level, the threat of the Blight is always hovering around as this impending threat to civilization, but on another level, the Blight is really just a pretext to bring the personal and political conflicts of the world to a head. Same thing with ME: The real antagonists were things like Mordin's ambivalence about the genophage, the Geth and Quarians' inability to overcome their mutual hatred and distrust, etc.
It's no accident that the plot of both ME3 and DA:O is to unify all the different factions against a common foe; at the end of the day, it doesn't much matter what that foe is, what matters is the way in which we overcome the various obstacles to achieving the requisite unity to fight them. That's why the ending's attempt to bring the Reapers' motivations to the forefront rang hollow for me; it treats the Reapers as though they are the conceit of the game even though they never really were.
I look at this pretty much the same way I look at Dragon Age: Origins. On one level, the threat of the Blight is always hovering around as this impending threat to civilization, but on another level, the Blight is really just a pretext to bring the personal and political conflicts of the world to a head. Same thing with ME: The real antagonists were things like Mordin's ambivalence about the genophage, the Geth and Quarians' inability to overcome their mutual hatred and distrust, etc.
It's no accident that the plot of both ME3 and DA:O is to unify all the different factions against a common foe; at the end of the day, it doesn't much matter what that foe is, what matters is the way in which we overcome the various obstacles to achieving the requisite unity to fight them. That's why the ending's attempt to bring the Reapers' motivations to the forefront rang hollow for me; it treats the Reapers as though they are the conceit of the game even though they never really were.
I agree with the first paragraph, but there's a major difference between the Blight and the Reapers: the design of the mass relays and the Citadel, coupled with the precise 50,000-year harvest hinged on technological and cultural advancement. There's a tangible, partly-revealed motive there, which furthers into ME2's harvesting of humans to create Reapers.
I agree with the first paragraph, but there's a major difference between the Blight and the Reapers: the design of the mass relays and the Citadel, coupled with the precise 50,000-year harvest hinged on technological and cultural advancement. There's a tangible, partly-revealed motive there, which furthers into ME2's harvesting of humans to create Reapers.
Fair enough, but there's still a wide gap between presenting clues pointing in the direction of the Reapers' motives, and elevating those motives to the status of the central conceit of the game. The former doesn't justify the latter.
I always thought the reasons for the harvesting was more of a technical detail. It's all basically an Ultimate Evil™ cycle.
Fair enough, but there's still a wide gap between presenting clues pointing in the direction of the Reapers' motives, and elevating those motives to the status of the central conceit of the game. The former doesn't justify the latter.
"I'm forging an alliance between us and the Reapers, between organics and machines, and in doing so, I will save more lives than have ever existed. But you would undo my work. You would doom our entire civilization to complete annihilation, and for that, you must die." - Saren, ME1
I'd say that it comes fairly close to the central conceit of the game.
A relatively cartoonish villain who appears in 4-5 scenes in the whole series stating why he does bad things constitutes the game's central conceit? Not seeing it.
A relatively cartoonish villain who appears in 4-5 scenes in the whole series stating why he does bad things constitutes the game's central conceit? Not seeing it.
Essentially. None of his appearances are optional and his mindset operates around the core antagonist's agenda, which involves the assembly and maintenance of the relay network and cutting off advanced civilizations once they're at their apex. You can't travel anywhere across the three games without using those devices, after all.
Guest_Magick_*
@haters Bite me
To OP:
1. They needed a inside man-Saren/TIM
2. The plot demands this. Vigil wasn't programmed for this Vendetta was. Javik wasn't in on the project, just a grunt/soldier
3. Someone already mentioned or theorized constructing a human reaper.
4. The reapers were fighting against the alliance. Someone again probably mentioned that the crucible was the Reapers idea.
The story in ME just gotten weaker as it progressed.
Essentially. None of his appearances are optional and his mindset operates around the core antagonist's agenda, which involves the assembly and maintenance of the relay network and cutting off advanced civilizations once they're at their apex. You can't travel anywhere across the three games without using those devices, after all.
It's not quite accurate to say that Saren's mindset operates around the Reapers' agenda; rather, his mindset serves their agenda. He doesn't think the way they think. He thinks the way they want him to think so that he'll serve their ends.
The other thing is this: Precisely what I argued a few posts ago is that the Reapers' aren't the core antagonists of the series; they're the pretext to bring the real antagonists to the forefront, which is partly why we spend way more time dealing with political and personal problems than dealing with them. As I see it, the core conceit of the series is the need to break free of one's history. The idea of a history that somehow binds or constricts us underwrites almost all of the games conflicts (the genophage, the Geth/Quarian conflict, the ME2 crew's various personal issues, etc.).
Even the relays play into this. From my point of view, the whole business about the relays having been built by the Reapers is just another sign pointing to the way in which we are bound by the past, rather than some pointer to some existential mystery of the universe grasped only by the Reapers. This is probably why the writers felt the need to blow them all up and give us some new beginning/Garden of Eden imagery in the ending.
Retour en haut