Seriously, I am getting tired of debating the same stuff with you every time.
http://forum.bioware...ruction-ending/
Shepard dies. In every ending. Only BioWare can prove me wrong. And they won't.
No, that's how bad writing works. If something just happens because the author clearly wants it to happen so it'll happen no matter how little sense it makes in the context of everything else then it's bad writing. With good writing it all flows together so feels natural, even though it's probably been worked out very, very carefully.First, yes, but that's the way writing works. That's the reason anything happens in Mass Effect: the writer made it happen through their own contrived rules, every last one of them.
Second, no, style over substance would be a conventional/military victory. I know better than to discuss the "substance" here to any degree, but it's certainly not the most egregious presentation of style over substance that could have come out of the situation.
And he's got to give his life (probably) for it? Please... It's bad enough that it'll boil down to one person on the spot.Third, "the whole Jesus thing" is all about the question posed to Shepard about the organic-synthetic conflict, The Reapers' purpose of creation, and the path the galaxy needs to take next, along with their sacrifice to enact the decision. One can make the complaint about "moody and meaningful" in any piece of fiction they don't like where the character dies.
Mass Effect has been posing questions and dishing out "deeper" moral dilemmas the entire time. You can't even get out of ME1 without throwing thousands under the bus for the destruction of one Reaper, and you have to consider galactic politics and the appearance of humanity, too, while a gun sits at the heads of the council. I don't agree with your assessment of the "genre".
Meanwhile ME3 introduced an "Action Mode" mechanic, to further drive home the fact that it isn't an action game nor should be thought of as one. 
It's not my fault that you can't disprove the Word of God.
I know you're a smart guy. I know you comprehend what he wrote. There's nothing in what he wrote that denounces Shepard dying in high EMS destroy.
Read the link (last two pages) I gave, and it'll all come back. Or not... having near 12000 posts must mean you write a lot. In that case I'll give direct links
Yes, you are, no matter the choice. You either nix the council and the Ascension in a passive sacrifice, or many thousands of human soldiers in a concentrated sacrifice. And it's your call. Should it have been? Who knows, but it was.
Do I have to remind you yet again that those humans were fully capable of shooting back at the geth? They were not hog-tied and thrown to the wolves.
One-liners don't dictate the genre, either. When you contemplate the positives and negatives of genocide and whether human lives are worth purging to preserve galactic stability and human posterity, then it's a bit more than an "action movie". Brainwash vs. destruction, research vs. moral integrity. It's spread across the entire trilogy.
I think I missed the part where anyone worth taking seriously argued that genocide might be a good thing for the galaxy.
I think that's a gross simplification, especially in a series built on moral dilemmas, but alright.
Not really. Feeling like you've done something wrong no matter which chocie you make isn't really a fun gaming experience.
Not really. Feeling like you've done something wrong no matter which chocie you make isn't really a fun gaming experience.
The funny thing? The first time I beat the game (pre-EC) I actually did feel like I had done something wrong.
"Contrived rules" would have been an improvement. This was completely arbitrary. They had an idea, and hammered it in no matter how poorly it may fit
Why does a military victory have to equal "conventional victory"?
Why does a nonconventional victory have to equal Shepard's death?
Still doesn't answer why they felt it was vital that Shepard die. Twice!
You realize that Shepard having to "die for the galaxy's sins" is the crux of the whole Space-Jesus thing, right?
Actually, Hackett's pronoun changes when he discusses the person who gets up to the Citadel. "She did it".
Hackett: Holy sh*t. She did it.
A moment later he will say, "This is the Admiral. We got reports that someone made it to the Citadel". Was he referring to Shepard when he said that or Anderson even though he had no idea Anderson went up the beam as well?
That, and to break up the goodbyes so the player wouldn't complain about the lack of infiltration during that time.
It still needed to go, I think.
I would get rid of the turret as well
You, the player, aren't throwing thousands under the bus in ME1. You do that only if you let the Council die. IMO that was one of the most asinine calls they allowed the player to make. Hackett was the fleet admiral and should have made the call. It is a fairly simple call to make.
That is one thing that bothered me. Why is Hackett following what Shepard says? Shepard has no idea what is happening. Hackett can see the battle, knows the fleet strength he brought with him and would be able to determine if he has enough to save the Destiny Ascension. Besides that, he had the element of surprise and would be able to destroy the Geth without any loss or at least very minimal loss.
Do I have to remind you yet again that those humans were fully capable of shooting back at the geth? They were not hog-tied and thrown to the wolves.
I think I missed the part where anyone worth taking seriously argued that genocide might be a good thing for the galaxy.
Not really. Feeling like you've done something wrong no matter which chocie you make isn't really a fun gaming experience.
I know you're a smart guy. I know you comprehend what he wrote.
There's nothing in what he wrote that denounces Shepard dying in high EMS destroy.
Read the link (last two pages) I gave, and it'll all come back. Or not... having near 12000 posts must mean you write a lot. In that case I'll give direct links
Hackett: Holy sh*t. She did it.
A moment later he will say, "This is the Admiral. We got reports that someone made it to the Citadel". Was he referring to Shepard when he said that or Anderson even though he had no idea Anderson went up the beam as well?
Answered your own question.
Not really. Why wouldn't he of said we got reports that a couple of people made it to the Citadel?
Not really. Why wouldn't he of said we got reports that a couple of people made it to the Citadel?
Except Shepard's death isn't mentioned once, and Shepard's survival is explicitly discussed.
I remember the discussion. Word of God remains intact.
Indeed. Shepard's survival is discussed. Word of God would mean he said it without it being a discussion. He could say Shepard survived. Simple as that.
He didn't.
"You may notice that in the “Shepard lives” ending, the love interest hesitates to place Shepard’s name on the wall, and instead looks up as though deep in thought. This is meant to suggest that the love interest is not ready to believe Shepard is dead, and the final scene reveals they are correct. As the Normandy lifts off, there is hope that the love interest and Shepard will again be together"
It's not hard to read this, and comprehend it. It's not WoG in any way, it's just a retelling of exactly what we see on screen. The final scene shows that the love interest is correct, true enough.... dead bodies don't breathe. How many breaths depend on the state of the body. Shepard, with those injuries, is not long for this world. "there is hope"? Is that a WoG? A vague statement of possibilities? No. it's not.
I think this is the third time I've had to point this out. Tully Auckland did not write a WoG. He wrote a vague description of what he hoped would be our interpretation of the scenes.
It's their call. Characters die. It happens. It'll continue to happen.
Yes, I realize Shepard being forced to make a hefty sacrifice (mortal in two endings) amid that dilemma is the crux of the Space Jesus idea.
Characters can die. Forcing the death of the protagonist may be their call. But it's a bad one.
It's that particular hefty price that is nigh-universally laid that evokes "Space Jesus". Please don't try to pretend that it's the general concept of a price that is in question here.
Because he hadn't gotten reports of a couple of people arriving on the Citadel (yet)?
"She did it." That's what's been reported.
I really would like to know your line of reasoning here. He/She depends on the gender of Shepard, fair enough. So what?
"As the Normandy lifts off, there is hope that the love interest and Shepard will again be together"
How does this mean that Shepard dies?
It's an official, structured post from BioWare, which makes it a Word of God.
I know you've tried to point this out before. It's not convincing.
Ah, I believed a Word of God needed to be specific, not vague. My mistake.
"As the Normandy lifts off, there is hope that the love interest and Shepard will again be together"
How does this mean that Shepard dies?
Edit; Semantics
It's an official, structured post from BioWare, which makes it a Word of God.
I know you've tried to point this out before. It's not convincing.
Word of God puts "Shepard Lives" in quotes
Also says "this is meant to suggest the LI is not ready to believe Shepard is dead" Which is not confirmation that Shepard lives nor even that the LI has anything beyond the Force to suspect otherwise (where was this sixth sense on Horizon?)
Also "As the Normandy lifts off there is hope that the love interest and Shepard will be together again"
Hope=/= certainty.
So where does Word of God confirm that Shepard survives?
Hackett: Holy sh*t. She did it.
A moment later he will say, "This is the Admiral. We got reports that someone made it to the Citadel". Was he referring to Shepard when he said that or Anderson even though he had no idea Anderson went up the beam as well?
I always viewed it this way - Hackett gets reports of some soldier using the beam. He automatically assumes it's Shepard because, well, Shepard did a lot of unbelievable things in the past. His next line is an official order, he can't tell everyone that Shepard did it based on a hunch.
I always viewed it this way - Hackett gets reports of some soldier using the beam. He automatically assumes it's Shepard because, well, Shepard did a lot of unbelievable things in the past. His next line is an official order, he can't tell everyone that Shepard did it based on a hunch.
Did you also know that Shepard died once? Would it be improbable to think it could happen again?
It doesn't. It also doesn't state Shepard lives. Just that there's hope they will meet again. So, the ambiguity they wanted for Destroy is indeed intact.
Yup. We get six endings where we get to watch Shepard die horribly. And one faceless torso, but with "hope"
It clearly all balances out /sarcasam
Did you also know that Shepard died once? Would it be improbable to think it could happen again?
Once was ridiculous enough.
It doesn't. It also doesn't state Shepard lives. Just that there's hope they will meet again. So, the ambiguity they wanted for Destroy is indeed intact.
Is it bad? The choice is yours, perhaps your Shepard is not willing to live after killing geth and EDI and you can kill him in headcanon. Mine was fine with that and now enjoys teaching at Grissom Academy along with his love interest - Jack.
Patrick Weekes says:
" ... In the end, I think a lot of the fan-reaction - and this doesn't mean it's unjustified, at all - is just grief. It's some of the most raw responses I've gotten, have been people who are grieving, because a character that was really important to them died and, you know, died for a worthy cause -- but died, and that sucks!"
Nail on the head, definitely a form of grief considering how attached people got to their Shepards. I believe the writers deliberately did it knowing what would happen because they wanted to avoid the hero walking off into the sunset cliche. While films and books can get away with it and oftentimes turn out better because of it, it definitely missed the mark with ME3. I think the writers felt pressure to end the franchise on a hugely grand, epic and poignant note and forgot that people play games to feel good ultimately.
I still think ME3 stands equally with ME1 and 2, but I admit I don't go to the Citadel on most of my playthroughs, whereas I really look forward to the ending on ME1 and 2.
Retour en haut