333 réponses à ce sujet

[Mcfly616]

Vigil gave you info, The Catalyst was stating his own opinion as a fact. The other problem with the catalyst is that it had too much control over the narrative of the ending. It really felt like they're just giving you an emotional ending while leaving the details open to the player's interpretations. I personally believe that the mass effect overall story was actually the best in the industry, Its ambiguity was merely there because you're actually the reapers' tool, You don't have that much details to understand their motives. It was building things up to give us the most amazing twist ending of them all, To make us understand their motives in the end. But it all went to waste without Drew.

Actually it's the other way around. Vigil was giving you info from the perspective of those Prothean scientists on Ilos. Vigil then proceeded to speculate on the why's and what's of the Reapers. Because they are "unknowable". The Catalyst gives cold hard facts regarding the Reapers, who they are and why they do what they do. 

 

 

 

Their motives are quite easy to understand.

[Cheviot]

Closest thing we have to "What were they thinking?"

 

It’s been 18-19 months since it came out and my thoughts on it are that we addressed it the best we could in the extended cut. We’re obviously not going to be changing anything now. We’re only going forward. But you know what’s interesting? The only view I’ve had on it was, well, I was watching Breaking Bad, and that deals with (spoiler alert) the main character dying. And in no way do I think that anybody was surprised that he died. It was set up, even from the get-go, that this was a character that was going to die. But the interesting difference there is that that’s not a character that people had control of. They didn’t have any say at any point at what would happen to Walter White. Period.

And I think that’s one of the things we really underestimated, which was how much ownership people would take over a character that they could do that. You know, you’ve been given free choice to make all these decisions with this character, with the fates of millions of people, and then, you don’t get to choose your own fate. And I’m not saying that our decision was wrong or right. I think we just underestimated the impact that would have on certain players. To be fair, I get people, especially at the Cons, who will say, “I loved it. It was heart-wrenching, but I felt it was right for my Shepard.” And to me, that’s why it was the right path. But because there was no choice, it was going to be right for some people, and for others, in the middle, and other people were obviously very upset about it. In hindsight, I don’t think there was anything we would have changed about that, but it is a really good lesson learned

 

Mac Walters October 2013

That's seems like a fair assessment; if there had been a get-out clause that meant Shepard survived at the end, there wouldn't be as many complaints about "plot holes."

[Iakus]

Indeed, probably not.

 

But the fact that so-called professional writers didn't anticipate something so blindingly obvious is just...  Argh!  It's enough to make me concuss myself facepalming.

 

And when faced with it, simply shrug and go "Oh, well.  Your opinion isn't important enough to us.  But thanks for the money!" or whatever simply feeds the fire.

[Mcfly616]

No. Vigil told you things as they were, He only "speculated" based on the scientific team's research. He didn't state that as a fact. He didn't tell you what to do. And no, It's not easy to understand, As i said, It was set up for greater things since day 1, This ambiguity, And it's quite clear in the dark energy ending that this was their original creative material. Mac just went along with the easiest interpretation possible of their motives. Anything else about their motives would be a fan interpretation.

 

P.S: The Leviathan DLC shows the true power and potential of the mass effect storyline.

 Vigil told you how things were from its perspective. Nothing more. Everything it stated regarding the Reapers (who, what, why and how they are)was nothing more than its own speculation. Maybe you should go talk to him again.

 

 

It may not be easy for you to understand. But it's fairly easy to comprehend. Even many people that hate the ending will tell you that much. There's nothing left to interpretation regarding their motives after the Extended Cut and Leviathan DLC. Their motives are literally explained. One could say they were spelled out for you.

 

 

P.S. I know, and it goes hand in hand with the Extended Cut (i.e. the Ending)

[Mcfly616]

 

So yeah, they thought the most 'artistic" way to end a narrative based role-playing game is to end it like a tv show and take away player choice.

 

 To be fair, regarding endings, ME1 and ME2 didn't give you any more choice than ME3. 

[Mcfly616]

Nope, Vigil told you what happened in the previous cycle, Fact. 

 

Yeah....and that's exactly what I said. It told you things from its perspective. A prothean VI that experienced the last cycle and fall of its creators. Nowhere did I refute that. 

[Mcfly616]

 

No, There's a LOT more to understand. I get what you're trying to say, But The Plot isn't holding together as a whole, The Dark energy concept would have given ME2 its purpose and tying the entire storyline together. It is pretty clear when Drew explained his concept that there's more to the story than meets the eye. As i said, Mac just took the easy approach. Their motives are explained by the EC and Leviathan, Sure, But it's a faulty explanation and disconnected from the series' narrative style. Plus, It doesn't really explain all the plot holes left open in its prequels. The Leviathan shows what mass effect can be, Its narrative and plot are brilliant, But they're just added to a faulty concept.

Not for me. I understand it all quite well. As do many, regardless of whether they like it or not. 

 

 

Everything else you've stated is merely your own subjective opinion. Some think the plot holds together just fine. Some find that the explaination fits perfectly with the narrative style (after all, organics and synthetics have been in conflict since the opening minutes of the trilogy).

 

Not sure what prequel plot holes you speak of (maybe clarify). And I'm not sure why you think ME3 is required to give ME2 its "purpose", as you say. Maybe it shouldn't have been solely focused on building a team and taking care of their personal issues in order to take out a single base. Maybe it should've focused on dark energy if they were really invested in it. But they weren't. Obviously.

[Vazgen]

"Most likely they are driven by motives and goals organic beings cannot hope to comprehend. In the end, what does it matter? Your survival depends on stopping them, not in understanding them."

Seems pretty forceful, don't you think?

[Mcfly616]

Alright. The difference between him and the catalyst, Is that he didn't tell you that organics and synthetics have to kill each others for no obvious reason. He didn't force a belief on you.

 

It didn't force a belief on you at all. It simply told you exactly how things are. How they've been since even before its own creation. Organics build synthetics. They eventually destroy eachother. It's inherent in their nature. It knows this because it's been observed countless times by itself and by those who created it long before its own existence (Leviathan)

[Rasande]

According to the dark energy plot, humans were "special". Which ME2 planted the seeds for by speaking of humans genetic diversity. And yes, dark energy was just mentioned by a handful of characters. It was never delved into whatsoever. The few times those words were spoken it always boiled down to "dark energy Idk what it is, but it doesn't make sense". Tali was the only person to even give any insight. Even she wasn't sure what it meant. And that was isolated to the star of that particular system.

 

 

How does the Collectors harvesting of humans into a Reaper tie into the organic/synthetic conflict plot that was implemented? Well, the Collectors are Reaper thralls. Shepard threw a wrench in spokes and delayed the invasion back in ME1. The Reapers are simply working through the Collectors to make up for lost time as they travel through dark space. Time they could've spent harvesting. Why are they targeting humans? Idk, seems like Shepard made an impression. He's human. Just my own observation.

 

Yes Dark Energy itself is pretty much only mentioned by Tali but dark energy and the diversity of humans are equally important to that plot. And the latter is mentioned all over the place, particularly by Mordin. It also ties into the plague in Omega, the Collectors and the Reaper larva.

 

Without the Dark Energy plot, everything the Collectors do in ME2 is just barely passable as a part in a trilogy. What would've been an "ah-ha" moment when the third game came around and a part that tied the games together pretty much just became an episode of the A-Team or an intermission.

 

While the detials may not have been final, too me it looks like the plot was decided while ME2 was in development and they switched direction when they changed lead writer.

I think that's the story David wanted to tell or he wouldn't have leaked it.

 

That's seems like a fair assessment; if there had been a get-out clause that meant Shepard survived at the end, there wouldn't be as many complaints about "plot holes."

 

I don't think so either, it's a video game and light entertainment, aslong as there was a happy ending to something you spend an evening relaxing with most people would be satisfied.

Personally i never minded if Shepard died, i think sacrificing herself to save the galaxy is an ok ending, but they completely underestimated what Shepard means to the audience.

It's not like a book or a TV show where you merely observe the protaginist, in a video game you embody them. And this particular character has become something of an icon in gaming that fans have grown to love over 5 years.

Makes me abit sad though, needing to constantly cater to an audience is one thing that keeps video games from taking seriously as an artform.

 

And(if i'm right) changing the story for the final chapter was a serious blunder and i'd rather have a well told and consistent story with a sad ending than a story only made to appeal. Shame i got neither lol

[Andrew Lucas]

What's so hard to understand about the Reaper's motives? The EC already clarified them, and Leviathan just screamed them at your face. ME3 had an enormous potential, and some things were fantastic, but most good aspects get overshadowed by it's ending when it comes to judge the game as a whole. Anyway, I should now hide myself.

[Mcfly616]

Not a subjective opinion, It was clear from the interview with Drew that this what he had in mind. If you think the info you have is quite enough, Then you're not really paying much attention to the game. ME3 was required to give the whole trilogy its purpose, To explain the origins and the motives of the reapers thoroughly and not to leave it open to the player's interpretations. Any plot holes that were left on purpose were supposed to be tied up and explained in the end. And that's what the dark energy ending was attempting to do. The reason why ME2 wasn't focused on the plot is unknown. Though i assume it was made like that just to build things up for the grand finale twist.

I'm well aware of Drew's interview and his description of the Dark Energy plot.

 

 

What you said was that what we currently have is something that doesn't makes sense or fit with the narrative. That's completely subjective. It's the very definition of subjective. 

 

 

Their motives were explained. Please, what was left up to interpretation?

 

 

I know Mass Effect like the back of my hand. 30+ trilogy playthroughs and counting. And you're going to tell me what info is enough for me? 

[Mcfly616]

Sounds like a forced concept to me. Mass Effect has always been about providing well-explained concepts. That's why the codex exists and that's why there're TONS of extras in the games. A concept like that is completely disconnected from the series' main core of narrative. That's the part of Leviathan that wasn't good. Why? Because it was implanted in a faulty storyline.

Seems like a pretty well explained concept to me. Your argument is that it wasn't in the codex? I'm not sure you grasp the purpose of the codex. Because it isn't to reveal the secrets of the MEU.

[Vazgen]

 

Sounds like a forced concept to me. Mass Effect has always been about providing well-explained concepts. That's why the codex exists and that's why there're TONS of extras in the games. A concept like that is completely disconnected from the series' main core of narrative. That's the part of Leviathan that wasn't good. Why? Because it was implanted in a faulty storyline.

Really? So... Cipher, human Reaper, Shepard's resurrection are well-explained? It seems you expected for ME3 to make sense of all the mess the first two games turned the plot with their inconsistency. And to be fair it mostly did. Reaper goals and motives are explained and backed by the evidence from previous games. 

And regarding what Drew wanted and what he didn't want, a quote from the man himself (Source)

Of course, some of you are also pinging me to find out what the “original” ending of the series was when we started planning out the trilogy. Sorry, but that’s not something I’m even going to attempt to answer. The collaborative creative process is incredibly complicated, and the story and ideas are constantly evolving as you go forward. Yes, we had a plan, but it was very vague. We knew we wanted to focus on some key themes and bring in certain key elements: organics vs synthetics; the Reapers; the Mass Relays. Beyond that, we didn’t go into detail because we knew it would change radically as the game continued to evolve.

[Ashevajak]

He was probably thinking "hey, resolving the central, defining issue of the Mass Effect universe by reference to Hegel's (much abused) notion of thesis, antithesis, synthesis would be a really great resolution.  Oh wait, I'm not sure how to express that in game.  Uh, colours are neat, that'll do."

[Tonymac]

I think that changing writers in a series results in things getting all out of whack.  If you read an Isaac Asimov series, or Heinlein or Niven there is a consistency to each of those series that seems to be lost in the ME franchise.  Somewhere in the BioWare company we lost the great talent that brought the magic.  The magic made it entertaining and limitless in plain and simple fun.

 

I used to dream Mass Effect.  So many worlds, so many places - so many possibilities.  Having the series end in such a brain dead and stupid manner (conversing with the star-brat and choosing the color of your death) seriously sucked.  Leviathans saw that war happens every time organics made synthetics - so they made a synthetic and it did the same thing to them, and all of us.  Um, yeah - that's really smart stuff (about as smart as a brain fart).

 

That went against everything we saw in ME 1.  Sovereign was not there to protect organics, he (it) was there to wipe them out.  That was even supported by the intro storyboard for ME 2 that let you make major choices from ME 1.  So it went from killing organics because it was a badass, to saving organics by killing them.

 

Changing writers ruined Mass Effect for me.  Mac may be really good at character writing, but it is obvious that the storyline of ME 3 could have been done a lot better (at least in my little view of it all).  What part did he have in all of that?  I'm not sure.  I will say that I have my doubts if he is on board and in that much control of the final product.  He is flippant, arrogant, and thinks very highly of himself.  Frankly, I think the series would have been better off if he had not been given the promotions he got.  Good writers left, and the damn character writer ended up taking the reigns (Can you say FUBAR train wreck?).    If ME: Next is as badly done storyline wise as ME 3, I will not be getting it.  While there were moments in ME 3 that were amazing, making a device capable of generating unquantifiable levels of destruction, but then having to use it with Reaper-Tech with it stinks of stupidity and poor writing.

 

I play video games to have fun, and ultimately win.  ME 3 had no release for me, no "win". 

Modifié par Craig Graff, 08 janvier 2015 - 02:46 .
Removed implied death threat. Inappropriate even in hyperbole.

[Rasande]

 

 

Really? So... Cipher, human Reaper, Shepard's resurrection are well-explained? It seems you expected for ME3 to make sense of all the mess the first two games turned the plot with their inconsistency. And to be fair it mostly did. Reaper goals and motives are explained and backed by the evidence from previous games. 

And regarding what Drew wanted and what he didn't want, a quote from the man himself (Source)

Of course, some of you are also pinging me to find out what the “original” ending of the series was when we started planning out the trilogy. Sorry, but that’s not something I’m even going to attempt to answer. The collaborative creative process is incredibly complicated, and the story and ideas are constantly evolving as you go forward. Yes, we had a plan, but it was very vague. We knew we wanted to focus on some key themes and bring in certain key elements: organics vs synthetics; the Reapers; the Mass Relays. Beyond that, we didn’t go into detail because we knew it would change radically as the game continued to evolve.

 

 

You forgott to underline "bring in". I think it's obvious organics vs snythetics is a key element from the start, but not necesarrily the main one. Also i think it's clear with the sentance "We wanted to focus on some key themes and bring in cirtain key elements: organics vs sythetics etc etc" that it wasn't originally intended to be the main one.

Drew is also a proffessional and won't be entirly candid about what went on.

 

The whole organics vs synthetics thing certainly isn't out of the blue and a theme i enjoyed alot, but it dosen't fit into the events of ME2 while the Dark Energy plot acually does beacuse it gives a larger purpouse to what the Collecters were doing that would've tied in with ME3.

[BioWareM0d13]

Drew K's ideas for Dark Energy were all about making the Reapers misunderstood heroes. It was even worse than what we actually got with the shipped product. With the Dark Energy endings the extinction cycles were somehow about trying to save the universe from an accelerated heat death.

 

What a twist.