1005 réponses à ce sujet

[AlanC9]

2. Played it about 4 times already and I'm about to start another playthrough, thanks for the suggestion - no plot detrimental maladies to report! See, at no point were I kicked in the nuts, left in confusion and despair, at no point did I go "WTF is this crap?!", and I certainly do not recall a months-long internet sh1tstorm that broke out over how Benezia was somehow able to resist indoctrination a bit, or how Joker mysteriously appeared over the Citadel with the Fifth Fleet when he was last seen at Ilos, half a galaxy away! I also don't remember people mustering over 70 000 $ charity to draw attention to the fact that the Cipher is a bit implausible. And I must have missed that part when outraged fans sent BW cookies which were mysteriously linked with each other (one disappeared when you ate another) to illustrate how ridiculous the Saren-Sovereign thing had been.
 
See now why I don't like it when someone tries to compare ME1 or ME2's flaws with that trainwreck from 2012? It's like watching Star Wars Prequels and going all "Hey, they weren't all that bad, I mean, the original trilogy had Ewoks, the exhaust port thing was stupid and also there was sound in vacuum! That ain't right!".

What's the actual argument here? It's not a logic or plot problem if people like it anyway?

[dreamgazer]

1. Oh, my usage of this term is petty. How magnanimous and not at all condescending of you to say that. So I happen to remember the sh1t BW pulled both ingame and afterwards in PR and that makes me petty. Fair enough. It's not, however, incorrect, with the value of the term that I place upon it, (and sure I'm honest about it, I'm not interested in any other use of that term, frankly), no matter how pitiable it may seem to you. And yes, it does stop ME1 from having space magic, as there wasn't any of that in there. Elaboration to follow.

Glad we're in agreement!
 

2. Played it about 4 times already and I'm about to start another playthrough, thanks for the suggestion - no plot detrimental maladies to report! See, at no point were I kicked in the nuts, left in confusion and despair, at no point did I go "WTF is this crap?!", and I certainly do not recall a months-long internet sh1tstorm that broke out over how Benezia was somehow able to resist indoctrination a bit, or how Joker mysteriously appeared over the Citadel with the Fifth Fleet when he was last seen at Ilos, half a galaxy away! I also don't remember people mustering over 70 000 $ charity to draw attention to the fact that the Cipher is a bit implausible. And I must have missed that part when outraged fans sent BW cookies which were mysteriously linked with each other (one disappeared when you ate another) to illustrate how ridiculous the Saren-Sovereign thing had been.
 
No space magic!

You're engaging in what a fellow poster on this board refers to as "intellectual dishonesty", then.

Let's try not to engage in a plea to popular overreaction opinion and address the concerns in my examples. Prove they're not also space magic, and that "space magic" didn't exist in the game that started the trilogy in the first place.

[Staff Cdr Alenko]

What's the actual argument here? It's not a logic or plot problem if people like it anyway?

 

No, the argument here is what it had always been: Not every plot, narrative, structure or other inconsistency or flaw is comparable to another one, and flaws which ME1 and ME2 have aren't comparable with those that the Trainwreck had, as illustrated by the reaction of the people who actually played those games. There's a difference between some folks going "hey, that doesn't quite make sense" or "that doesn't really hold up narratively" over a part of the game which is iffy - and those folks may be dead on right, in fact mostly in such cases they are! - and thousands of painfully disappointed people who invested so much into a narrative which had immersion and ever so much of that which TV Tropes calls Video Game Caring Potential and then saw it all fail so hard on its face.

[dreamgazer]

What's the actual argument here? It's not a logic or plot problem if people like it anyway?

Apparently not.

[Staff Cdr Alenko]

You're engaging in what a fellow poster on this board refers to as "intellectual dishonesty", then.

Let's try not to engage in a plea to popular overreation opinion and address the concerns in my examples. Prove they're not also space magic, and that "space magic" didn't exist in the game that started the trilogy in the first place.

 

I already have done just that. You are not accepting my usage of the term "space magic", which is fine, but then what exactly is it that you ask of me? There was no retarded, asinine, three coloured piece of garbage that the Crucible is in ME1. Case closed.

 

As for the rest, what is this "intellectual dishonesty"? How is anything I said "intellectually dishonest"? How people react to different things doesn't just come out of thin air. You call this overreaction, and I say - by what right? How can you be the judge of how strongly someone feels about something he or she holds dear? You say overreaction, I may as well call you insensitive and unfeeling over that.

 

I'll quote (if not very accurately as to the wording, but faithfully in meaning) a certain youtuber - people can generally distinguish (when it comes to playing games) when they are being shoveled swill to be downed face first from a troth, and when they are presented with painstakingly, lovingly crafted masterpieces.

 

Add that to the fact that The Trainwreck was a very different game to its predecessors, especially in feeling and tone, and the fact that it wasn't very well polished and was in all probability horribly rushed - it all comes together, really.

 

There were no neutral options in dialogues - that is a fact.

Fan favourite characters have been sidelined or killed of via Twitter - that is a fact.

The tone of the game was different and much bleaker than in previous ones - that is a fact.

There were lines important to the character arc recycled word for word from ME2 - that is a fact.

The devs wanted the third part of a trilogy to somehow be "the best place for new players to start" - that is a fact.

This is probably going to seem ridiculous to you that I even mention something that small, but there was no grain effect to be found in graphics options - that is another fact, and it's very small, but to me it seems funnily significant and a clue as to the character of the game.

There had to be a galactic internet rage for the ending to be altered in a way so that it would at least recognize the importance of the player's party in an RPG game with a party central to the main character's efforts - that is a fact.

 

Opinions were - as always - mixed, but there was enough negative ones to spawn hundreds of pages of people expressing their disappointment, collect thousands of dollars - come on, a charity over a video game ending! - to raise awareness of the issue, and to make long-time, loyal consumers turn away from the company they used to hero-worship over how this very company treated them.

 

Mind you, I'm not even one of those long-time consumers, I just played KotORs and Mass Effects. And that's the way it's gonna stay.

[dreamgazer]

Heh. You still can't do it.

[AlanC9]

No, the argument here is what it had always been: Not every plot, narrative, structure or other inconsistency or flaw is comparable to another one, and flaws which ME1 and ME2 have aren't comparable with those that the Trainwreck had, as illustrated by the reaction of the people who actually played those games. There's a difference between some folks going "hey, that doesn't quite make sense" or "that doesn't really hold up narratively" over a part of the game which is iffy - and those folks may be dead on right, in fact mostly in such cases they are! - and thousands of painfully disappointed people who invested so much into a narrative which had immersion and ever so much of that which TV Tropes calls Video Game Caring Potential and then saw it all fail so hard on its face.

This doesn't differ from what I said. Your metric for determining the severity of a "flaw" is how much it bothered people, as opposed to how illogical or incoherent said flaw was. This would be OK if you were making the argument "ME3 was emotionally unfulfilling!," but you're not. The "intellectual dishonesty" comes in if you're deliberately muddling these things up, as opposed to just not being able to keep your own argument straight.

There's an interesting conversation to be had along these lines, but you need to stop cluttering the channel up with noise. Why do some illogical plots bother people while others don't? I can't investigate the question myself since I don't ever get bothered by this stuff

[Staff Cdr Alenko]

Apparently my post got removed because it contained a word that was altered to cheat the word filter. I actually thought of it as an auto-censor of sorts, like writing nothing but stars instead of a swear word, but hey. The word in question was a synonym for "poo", basically. What really interests me, though, is why when someone else (I'm not gonna quote) did THE VERY SAME THING (using an * instead of a 1, but that's it) ON THE PREVIOUS PAGE of this very thread, nothing happened. I wonder if it was because I used the expression "The [offensive word] BW pulled". Now that would be interesting. And in the best traditions of BioWare mods from the Golden Era of BSN. Where has Ninja Stan gone to?

Fortunately, dreamgazer was kind enough to quote that post almost entirely, so here comes the pre-watershed version:

1. Oh, my usage of this term is petty. How magnanimous and not at all condescending of you to say that. So I happen to remember the EXCREMENT BW pulled both ingame and afterwards in PR and that makes me petty. Fair enough. It's not, however, incorrect, with the value of the term that I place upon it, (and sure I'm honest about it, I'm not interested in any other use of that term, frankly), no matter how pitiable it may seem to you. And yes, it does stop ME1 from having space magic, as there wasn't any of that in there. Elaboration to follow.

2. Played it about 4 times already and I'm about to start another playthrough, thanks for the suggestion - no plot detrimental maladies to report! See, at no point were I kicked in the nuts, left in confusion and despair, at no point did I go "WTF is this crap?!", and I certainly do not recall a months-long internet FECIES-storm that broke out over how Benezia was somehow able to resist indoctrination a bit, or how Joker mysteriously appeared over the Citadel with the Fifth Fleet when he was last seen at Ilos, half a galaxy away! I also don't remember people mustering over 70 000 $ charity to draw attention to the fact that the Cipher is a bit implausible. And I must have missed that part when outraged fans sent BW cookies which were mysteriously linked with each other (one disappeared when you ate another) to illustrate how ridiculous the Saren-Sovereign thing had been.
 
No space magic!

There you go. There was also a bit at the end about the gif image of Miss Holloway, which basically said she was lovely but if she only has one gif that's possible to use as a board weapon then that's a significant disadvantage.

 

 

Anyway...

 

Heh. You still can't do it.

 

You still didn't ask me to. Are you asking me to find an explanation for the parts of ME1 narrative which you hold questionable? Is that what you're trying to say? Because then you're right, I can't do it. The Cipher is just the Cipher, just like Eezo is just Eezo; Thorian was very old and unique, and apparently had cloning capabilities. I'm fine with that. Indoctrination is basically mind-probing, and Benezia was a Matriarch, a thousand years old. She had strong will. You might as well ask why Shepard wasn't indoctrinated by Object Rho. What was next? Oh, Saren-Sovereign link. Yes, when you think about it it doesn't really make much sense, especially with the Reapers controlling thousands of minions through indoctrination, how did they do that if apparently breaking this control by killing the minion makes their shields drop... Why does it make their shields drop... Maybe it didn't, maybe it was concentrated fire from the fleets, and the shields were only weakened by Saren getting dropped and together that was enoug... you know what, I don't care. It works. The narrative flows, Shepard kills the bad guy, the fleets drop the big bad guy. Crowning moment of awesome.

 

 

This doesn't differ from what I said. Your metric for determining the severity of a "flaw" is how much it bothered people, as opposed to how illogical or incoherent said flaw was. This would be OK if you were making the argument "ME3 was emotionally unfulfilling!," but you're not. The "intellectual dishonesty" comes in if you're deliberately muddling these things up, as opposed to just not being able to keep your own argument straight.

There's an interesting conversation to be had along these lines, but you need to stop cluttering the channel up with noise. Why do some illogical plots bother people while others don't? I can't investigate the question myself since I don't ever get bothered by this stuff

 

There is a difference. People start caring about holes when they BREAK the plot. And The Trainwreck ended up BROKEN. So am I muddling things up, really? Or are they inherently connected? You can't pick apart the logic of the narrative and its emotional impact, especially in a setting like Mass Effect. THAT would be intellectual dishonesty.

 

But you're right, the case I'm making really is that The Trainwreck was emotionally unfulfilling. More than that actually, it was emotionally gutting. And among reasons why it was so was that it butchered the setting, the lore and characters beyond recognition.

 

 

 

"I don't know what you mean by 'glory,' " Alice said.
Humpty Dumpty smiled contemptuously. "Of course you don't—till I tell you. I meant 'there's a nice knock-down argument for you!' "
"But 'glory' doesn't mean 'a nice knock-down argument'," Alice objected.
"When I use a word," Humpty Dumpty said, in rather a scornful tone, "it means just what I choose it to mean—neither more nor less."

 

 

Funny. It is like that, though, you're absolutely right. I have stated my reasons for associating a specific meaning with the term and I'm sticking to it. The Humpty Dumpty really was the narrative in the Trainwreck. All the king's horses and all the king's men couldn't put it back together again after whoever has commited it was done with it.

[dreamgazer]

You still didn't ask me to. Are you asking me to find an explanation for the parts of ME1 narrative which you hold questionable? Is that what you're trying to say? Because then you're right, I can't do it. The Cipher is just the Cipher, just like Eezo is just Eezo; Thorian was very old and unique, and apparently had cloning capabilities. I'm fine with that. Indoctrination is basically mind-probing, and Benezia was a Matriarch, a thousand years old. She had strong will. You might as well ask why Shepard wasn't indoctrinated by Object Rho. What was next? Oh, Saren-Sovereign link. Yes, when you think about it it doesn't really make much sense, especially with the Reapers controlling thousands of minions through indoctrination, how did they do that if apparently breaking this control by killing the minion makes their shields drop... Why does it make their shields drop... Maybe it didn't, maybe it was concentrated fire from the fleets, and the shields were only weakened by Saren getting dropped and together that was enoug... you know what, I don't care. It works. The narrative flows, Shepard kills the bad guy, the fleets drop the big bad guy. Crowning moment of awesome.

 

Bingo.  I could take it point-by-point, but your casual hand-waving pretty much indirectly did the trick. Thanks!

[Staff Cdr Alenko]

Bingo.  I could take it point-by-point, but your casual hand-waving pretty much indirectly did the trick. Thanks!

 

No problem. Now tell me how do any of these minor details break or damage the narrative.

[dreamgazer]

No problem. Now tell me how do any of these minor details break or damage the narrative.

 

You mean beside the fact that these enigmatic, magical touches are absolutely essential to the narrative, and that they're not "minor details"?

[Staff Cdr Alenko]

You mean beside the fact that these enigmatic, magical touches are absolutely essential to the narrative, and that they're not "minor details"?

 

Just tell me how do the fact that Benezia resists indoctrination to talk to Shepard or that the Thorian is able to clone an asari, or indeed any other flaw in ME1 which you mentioned earlier damage the narrative.

[dreamgazer]

Just tell me how do the fact that Benezia resists indoctrination to talk to Shepard or that the Thorian is able to clone an asari, or indeed any other flaw in ME1 which you mentioned earlier damage the narrative.

 

Simple: it's relying on nonsensical space magic as a way of hand-waving plot developments, movement, and twists, when the writer clearly could have done otherwise. Space magic harbors essential information that would be unobtainable without it, not to mention leads to the ultimate defeat of the "bad guy". None of it was necessary, yet the plot wouldn't exist or develop or surprise or conclude without it, thus forcing it to be necessary.  The crew could have learned about Ilos in any number of ways, but it took several brain filters, a Matriarch's conveniently walled-off portion of her brain, and a sentient telepathic plant and its cloned asari buddy to do so.  They could have just defeated Sovereign with guns blazin' in the true F-YEAH galaxy fashion that conventional-victory folks hold dear, yet it took a magical link to hopper Saren and the forced sacrifice of tens of thousands of lives (as well as a deus-ex-machina datafile delivered from a randomly still-active 50k-year-old AI) to do so.  

 

That's the entire crux behind the "space magic" gripe in the first place: Rule of Cool above sensible storytelling.  ME1 relies on the entirely improbable and fantastical quite a bit. 

[AlanC9]

That's the entire crux behind the "space magic" gripe in the first place: Rule of Cool above sensible storytelling.  ME1 relies on the entirely improbable and fantastical quite a bit.

Hmm.... maybe what matters is that previous ME games didn't deploy any of the fantastical stuff at points where the character had to make a decision. For instance, Shepard's on autopilot when he reaches Shiala and Benezia, because literally the only thing to do with them is accept the plot coupons they hand out.(Though you can shoot Shiala a minute later if that's what you're into.) And afterward you're either doing what you were doing before, or you've got all your coupons and the only thing to do is cash them in. I can see how there's no particular need to engage critical intelligence at those points. Conversely, you can only avoid thinking about the Reapers' motivations by a conscious act of will, since the very next thing you have to do is decide what do do with them. Note how many players say something along the lines of "Destroy was Shepard's goal all along, so that's all there is to it."

My sig started as a kind of joke, but now I'm not so sure.

[dreamgazer]

Hmm.... maybe what matters is that previous ME games didn't deploy any of the fantastical stuff at points where the character had to make a decision.

 

That's possible, even though the "humans or council + aliens" forced-sacrifice decision is in pretty close proximity to the hopper Saren fight, which is inextricably linked to the Sovereign battle. 

[Staff Cdr Alenko]

Simple: it's relying on nonsensical space magic as a way of hand-waving plot developments, movement, and twists, when the writer clearly could have done otherwise. Space magic harbors essential information that would be unobtainable without it, not to mention leads to the ultimate defeat of the "bad guy". None of it was necessary, yet the plot wouldn't exist or develop or surprise or conclude without it, thus forcing it to be necessary.  The crew could have learned about Ilos in any number of ways, but it took several brain filters, a Matriarch's conveniently walled-off portion of her brain, and a sentient telepathic plant and its cloned asari buddy to do so.  They could have just defeated Sovereign with guns blazin' in the true F-YEAH galaxy fashion that conventional-victory folks hold dear, yet it took a magical link to hopper Saren and the forced sacrifice of tens of thousands of lives (as well as a deus-ex-machina datafile delivered from a randomly still-active 50k-year-old AI) to do so.  

 

That's the entire crux behind the "space magic" gripe in the first place: Rule of Cool above sensible storytelling.  ME1 relies on the entirely improbable and fantastical quite a bit. 

 

None of these things take the player out of the game experience, break immersion or the suspension of disbelief. They are all executed in such a way that nobody, unless they are actively picking the plot apart for inconsistencies, is bothered by them. There are elements that aren't stricly hard sci-fi, yes. But there was a metrical ton of such element in Star Trek as well, and was that ever a problem? Why is this even a problem here? The Cipher is just an integral part of the story, which flows very naturally (narratively speaking) with it in it. As it is with all these other things.

 

Even with the Trainwreck this mechanism of suspension of disbelief works throughout the game. You go along and there are contrivances and retcons and plot holes and inconsistencies all the way through, much, much more so than ever before in either ME1 or 2, but you push them aside thinking "mhmmmokay, this is going to sort itself out in the end". The problem is that it doesn't sort itself out. All that built up faith that in the end somehow pieces will be picked up and there will be a satisfying ending just plummets to the ground because the nonsense shoots sky high at the very end. There is no resolution to anything, and the problems created along the way cannot be ignored. Arguably there is some resolution in EC but it feels flat, contrived and lifeless. It feels like it was thrown together in a rush with a "bugger off" mindset, and that's because it probably was.

 

And finally, comparing anything that happens after the star brat shows up with anything from ME1 or ME2 is just wrong, even if you set aside the factor of its emotional impact. The nonsensicalness of this whole last conversation is uncanny, with "a new DNA", "they are my solution" "the created shall always rebel", "you would not know them and there is not enough time to explain" etc. It's just a complete bowl of utter rubbish and nothing - nothing! - comes close, not even in the same reality as this.

 

(...) even though the "humans or council + aliens" forced-sacrifice decision is in pretty close proximity to the hopper Saren fight, which is inextricably linked to the Sovereign battle. 

 

Rubbish. That choice was very well placed thematically, it was all about idealistic vs pragmatic (vs vengeful evil in the bottom renegade option) and there was nothing forced about it - either you tell the fleet to come in early and save others, despite them being aliens, or you hang back. This whole "link" thing is just a matter of when Sovereign goes down, it's all about pacing.

[dreamgazer]

None of these things take the player out of the game experience, break immersion or the suspension of disbelief. They are all executed in such a way that nobody, unless they are actively picking the plot apart for inconsistencies, is bothered by them. There are elements that aren't stricly hard sci-fi, yes. But there was a metrical ton of such element in Star Trek as well, and was that ever a problem? Why is this even a problem here? The Cipher is just an integral part of the story, which flows very naturally (narratively speaking) with it in it. As it is with all these other things.

Entirely subjective viewpoint that, once again, hand-waves every ounce of space magic present in ME1.

The cipher and its application are complete, improbable nonsense that, oddly, establishes the idea of the "essence" of an organism or species.
 

Even with the Trainwreck this mechanism of suspension of disbelief works throughout the game. You go along and there are contrivances and retcons and plot holes and inconsistencies all the way through, much, much more so than ever before in either ME1 or 2, but you push them aside thinking "mhmmmokay, this is going to sort itself out in the end". The problem is that it doesn't sort itself out. All that built up faith that in the end somehow pieces will be picked up and there will be a satisfying ending just plummets to the ground because the nonsense shoots sky high at the very end. There is no resolution to anything, and the problems created along the way cannot be ignored. Arguably there is some resolution in EC but it feels flat, contrived and lifeless. It feels like it was thrown together in a rush with a "bugger off" mindset, and that's because it probably was.

How is there no resolution when the Reaper threat is concluded no matter the decision, especially in Destroy? And why is the "nonsense" in the ending any more prominent than the other magical hand-wavey content in the series? It's easier to explain two of the three functions of the Crucible than many things in both ME1 and ME2, after all, including the "collective unconsciousness" of the cipher and Lazarus' ability to restart a brain to full memory and experiential capacity.
 

And finally, comparing anything that happens after the star brat shows up with anything from ME1 or ME2 is just wrong, even if you set aside the factor of its emotional impact. The nonsensicalness of this whole last conversation is uncanny, with "a new DNA", "they are my solution" "the created shall always rebel", "you would not know them and there is not enough time to explain" etc. It's just a complete bowl of utter rubbish and nothing - nothing! - comes close, not even in the same reality as this.

Hey, Tali, what do you have to say about the creator-created conflict?

http://youtu.be/OUjIHRNOKgc?t=7m25s
 
 

Rubbish. That choice was very well placed thematically, it was all about idealistic vs pragmatic (vs vengeful evil in the bottom renegade option) and there was nothing forced about it - either you tell the fleet to come in early and save others, despite them being aliens, or you hang back. This whole "link" thing is just a matter of when Sovereign goes down, it's all about pacing.

Not rubbish at all. There was plenty forced about the Ascension just randomly being there at that particular time and place, since that ideological conflict wasn't necessary in the slightest during the Sovereign battle and since the game didn't afford you any alternatives in how to handle it. Not to mention that the council was "held hostage" to manipulate the decision, and that it's made clear through squad dialogue that there are human vs. alien thematic tones and implications to the decision, not just ideals against practicality.

[Staff Cdr Alenko]

Entirely subjective viewpoint that, once again, hand-waves every ounce of space magic present in ME1.
 

 

There is no space magic in ME1. Space magic is a machine that paints the galaxy red, green or blue, with a beam of light.

 

 

The cipher and its application are complete, improbable nonsense that, oddly, establishes the idea of the "essence" of an organism or species.
 

 

The Cipher is just the ability to understand the Prothean warning in the beacon. I'm sorry, but I have never heard anyone complaining about the Cipher before. It establishes nothing except that Protheans were very alien in relation to humans, asari, turians etc.

 

 

How is there no resolution when the Reaper threat is concluded no matter the decision, especially in Destroy? And why is the "nonsense" in the ending any more prominent than the other magical hand-wavey content in the series? It's easier to explain two of the three functions of the Crucible than many things in both ME1 and ME2, after all, including the "collective unconsciousness" of the cipher and Lazarus' ability to restart a brain to full memory and experiential capacity.
 

 

Space Casper allows you to win. Congrats, hero, you just saved the galaxy. With a Reaper off button. Talking to a ghost child. Yaaaaay... So much resolution, so much gratification...

 

As for the Crucible, it's supposed to have been built by a collaboration of completely different races over millions of years, it has three radically different functions, possibly with horrifying consequences that can be unleashed by an unspecified person in an unknown time and at the same time "is little more than a power source". It is effectively a Reaper off button. It's asinine.

 

The things you call magical hand-wavey stuff don't affect matters on that scale. Like I said before, in ME1 and 2 suspension of disbelief is sustained. In Trainwreck, it is broken. It's as simple as that. Not just with the Crucible, but with many plot elements. Not just with plot elements, but with a combination of terrible plot, pacing, tone, structure, execution and theme elements.

 

 

Hey, Tali, what do you have to say about the creator-created conflict?

http://youtu.be/OUjIHRNOKgc?t=7m25s
 
 

 

The conflict which has ultimately ended in peace?

 

 

Not rubbish at all. There was plenty forced about the Ascension just randomly being there at that particular time and place, since that ideological conflict wasn't necessary in the slightest during the Sovereign battle and since the game didn't afford you any alternatives in how to handle it. Not to mention that the council was "held hostage" to manipulate the decision, and that it's made clear through squad dialogue that there are human vs. alien thematic tones and implications to the decision, not just ideals against practicality.

 

Let's see. Citadel comes under attack from Sovereign and the geth. Destiny Ascension and the Citadel fleet defends Citadel. Ascension is the most powerful unit in Citadel fleet. Therefore, geth ships attack it vigorously. Ascension is in trouble. Alliance fleet shows up. They either save the Ascension or bypass it to focus on Sovereign.

 

Yeah. I can totally see how that's forced, because there's no way that the Council would have been evacuated to what was considered the safest ship in the neighbourhood when the Presidium was being shot up. And there's no way that enemy forces would focus on that big, important, dangerous ship. What a load of nonsense!

 

 

Does this thread recquire more derailment or is it the rend of rine?

[ImaginaryMatter]

Don't want to get too involved but I always read the destruction of Saren hopper and the destruction of Sovereign as simply adjacent, but independent events. Like Sovereign was getting worried because it was under barrage and couldn't last forever so it took over Saren to get to the control panel and get rid of Shepard. When Saren hopper died Sovereign then soon ran out of juice or whatever and fell over, the red sparks and letting go of the tower I took as artistic license. It never even occurred to me that there was some sort of feedback until the Codex entry in ME3 because that would be really dumb. Like if I control an RC plane and it crashes the controller in my hand doesn't blow up.

 

As for the problems in each individual game affecting the over all experiences I always felt like ME1 were missed notes in a song or a stumble during a race. Sure they were some combination of disruptive, weird, and/or silly but overall the story was decent and they didn't harm the overall experience (like maybe the Cipher would be much better if it had a Codex entry or Benezia's message was left behind in a diary). If it was any other game that didn't have in depth explanations of things I probably wouldn't even have cared or noticed some of them. It wasn't until the later two that there were massive story elements like Cerberus, the Collectors, the universe's stoic reactions to Shepard's resurrection, and the ME3 ending where nearly every single facet is nonsensical or not well thought out where the plot just sort of crabs and the story boat flips over.

[AlanC9]

That's possible, even though the "humans or council + aliens" forced-sacrifice decision is in pretty close proximity to the hopper Saren fight, which is inextricably linked to the Sovereign battle.

Right, but you can stop thinking about the Saren-hopper the moment it dies, and before that the only thing to do is shoot it. The only fact you need to remember is that Sovereign is dead. How that happened isn't really relevant anymore.

[KaiserShep]

It seemed pretty clear to me that the connection to the Saren hopper left Sovereign vulnerable. I wonder if Harbinger kept getting zapped every time Shepard killed a possessed Collector.

[AlanC9]

Don't want to get to involved but I always read the destruction of Saren hopper and the destruction of Sovereign as simply adjacent, but independent events. Like Sovereign was getting worried because it was under barrage and couldn't last forever so it took over Saren to get to the control panel and get rid of Shepard. When Saren hopper died Sovereign then soon ran out of juice or whatever and fell over, the red sparks and letting go of the tower I took as artistic license. It never even occurred to me that there was some sort of feedback until the Codex entry in ME3 because that would be really dumb. Like if I control an RC plane and it crashes the controller in my hand doesn't blow up.

I always liked this reading myself. It's a shame that Codex entry got in.

[AlanC9]

There is no space magic in ME1. Space magic is a machine that paints the galaxy red, green or blue, with a beam of light.

So space magic = whatever tech Staff Lt. Alenko doesn't like. Jeez... I didn't realize my Alice quote upthread was actually true. I thought I was just being snarky about a sloppy argument.

[wolfhowwl]

The stuff in ME2 that involved the Reapers, Cerberus, the Collectors, the Suicide Mission, you know the actual plot of the game, was idiotic. The game was able to successfully distract people from that by focusing instead on episodic character pieces (albeit at the cost of not really advancing anything of consequence), waifuism, and having an "epic" adrenaline pumping ending (that also screwed over development of the next game).

 

Of course ME3 being the final entry in the trilogy didn't have that luxury and had to focus on the main issues of the series and effectively crammed two games worth of story into one after ME2's failure to achieve much of anything at all.

[Staff Cdr Alenko]

So space magic = whatever tech Staff Lt. Alenko doesn't like. Jeez... I didn't realize my Alice quote upthread was actually true. I thought I was just being snarky about a sloppy argument.

 

You must have missed my sloppy argument, because I have explained what I mean by the term "space magic". You may have also missed this:

 

"I don't know what you mean by 'glory,' " Alice said.
Humpty Dumpty smiled contemptuously. "Of course you don't—till I tell you. I meant 'there's a nice knock-down argument for you!' "
"But 'glory' doesn't mean 'a nice knock-down argument'," Alice objected.
"When I use a word," Humpty Dumpty said, in rather a scornful tone, "it means just what I choose it to mean—neither more nor less."

 

Funny. It is like that, though, you're absolutely right. I have stated my reasons for associating a specific meaning with the term and I'm sticking to it. The Humpty Dumpty really was the narrative in the Trainwreck. All the king's horses and all the king's men couldn't put it back together again after whoever has commited it was done with it.

 

So no, it's not everything I don't like. It's just the Crucible and how it works. Remember, say, Kai Leng? It's safe to say I don't like him, and he =/= space magic. He happens to be a space ninja.