590 réponses à ce sujet

[Iakus]

Emotion. If you have never witnessed or experienced loss, you won't feel it. I know, it happened to me when I was a child.

Perspective is based on previous experiences.

Personality is a collection of traits which all are based on experience.

Preserving memories seemed to work for the geth.

In Control Shepard gains the collective knowledge of the Reapers. That is bound to change his outlook. Doesn't mean he's not Shepard anymore. It's like saying that Shepard is not himself anymore after the Prothean beacon and the Cipher which is not the case in the game.

 

Until the Reaper code is uploaded, the geth have no individual personalities at all.  They are all "geth"

 

And in fact, the CIpher at least, would have made for a very interesting question of "Is Shepard still Shepard?"  A pity the CIpher was largely forgotten about after ME1.

[Iakus]

She becomes something greater.

Greater.  LEsser.  Still not SHepard either way.

[themikefest]

My femshep lives after  shooting the tube. She's currently in Vancouver having drinks with Sam. 

[Iakus]

This is as ridiculous as the question "What is the meaning of life?" and someone actually thinking they have an answer. 

42

[dreamgazer]

He won't be Shepard anymore.  
 
Shepard is, after all, organic

Then, to be fair, Shepard hasn't been Shepard for 2/3rds of the series, since LazarusShep is a very vague hybrid of both.

OrganicShep got spaced.

[Iakus]

Then, to be fair, Shepard hasn't been Shepard for 2/3rds of the series, since LazarusShep is a very vague hybrid of both.
OrganicShep got spaced.

A strong argument for that can be made too. And part of the reason I dislike ME2'S opening.

And why I think the option to struggle with that should have been more than a single dialogue option near the end of ME3

[DesioPL]

What's point of this mess again remind me? After three years of ME3 release.

[wolfhowwl]

The cycle cannot be broken.

[angol fear]

A bit thick on the hyperbole, but essentially yes.  THe entire middle portion of the trilogy spins its wheels regarding the Reaper threat.  THere are plot points that go nowhere (Hades' Dogs in ME1, Haestrum in ME2).    THere are important choices that are trivialized or go nowhere (Human Councilor chocie, Collector Base)  THis story didn't "evolve" it was practically stream-of-consciousness.

 

So if the second Mass Effect feels disonnected to the reapers threat it means that they don't know how to end? That's nonsense. You're ignoring what have been set in Mass Effect 1. For Haestrum in Mass Effect 2, it goes nowhere? I usually prefer to use video from the game but it would be too long so here :

http://masseffect.wi...iki/Dark_energy

 

and in this one "Javelin missile launchers" and "Conrad" :

 

http://masseffect.wi...Assets/Crucible

 

It doesn't go nowhere, it goes where you didn't want it to go because you were expecting a dark energy ending (which is a total nonsense if you only played the game and didn't take care of the internet speculations).

 

And for the choices you have to blame Mass Effect 2, not Mass Effect 3.

 

And anyway, ignoring that something like Mass Effect is such a huge work that the ending couldn't be entirely written since the first Mass Effect, this just shows that you don't know what writing is.

 

General Oraka tells Shepard he/she would make a good general someday.  Is that a "clue" also?

 

No. You totally misunderstand it. I won't give you answers, you'll have to understand with the clues given by the game itself.

 

It's  a pretty common phrase in the trilogy.  If you pay attention 

 

So you can't see the difference between the narration and how the character try to act. You're trapped in your own representation of the game, you didn't really played the game, you played what you wanted to see, ignoring the writing of the game.

 

Basically, I wanted to see how it ended for my Shepard.  I went into ME3 with very low expectations, and it couldn't even meet those.

 

With low expectations we don't spend years saying that it's bad writing...

 

Illogical, disjointed narrative, ooc behavior in characters, "ass pulls".

 

The problem is that the ending is not like that : not illogical, not disjointed etc...

 

Just because someone is trying to weave a complex story, doesn't mean they succeed.  I can try to prepare a big fancy banquet.  Doesn't mean I'll succeed.

 

I agree and the Wachowski are an example. They do "complex" stories but in my opinion, they don't succeed. But they try so I don't criticize that point. And I'm glad they try.

 

Actually I used it as a reference because it was also the end of an ambitious science fiction trilogy that turned out to be hugely disappointing.  That Mac Walters invoked it is simply a piece of delicious irony.   

 

Don't tell me you don't know that. You quote Mac Walters with "lots of speculation" and on the same document you've got that reference. It has been said again and again on this forum. You know that it's a reference. But actually I'm not sure that it's Matrix 3 ending, I think it's more the architect discussion the reference. That's why I don't think you're honest when you're saying that.

 

Well we agree that the ending is the most important part, at least.  But I still hold that Bioware disagreed.  Because it doesn't make sense.  Not unless you play specific Shepards and make particular choices.

 

It makes sense. If you don't understand, you should read Nietzsche. "Doesn't make sense", "pseudo intellectual" etc... all of these are just what people say because they don't want to think. It's easier to say that.

 

 

PS : "A strong argument for that can be made too. And part of the reason I dislike ME2'S opening." You dislike one of the few story part of Mass Effect 2, a very important part of the trilogy. Then why did you play Mass Effect 3, even with low expectations, if the story is not what you were expecting? Low expectations but 3 years hating the game while you admit that the story isn't what you like. That's strange, isn't it?

[Iakus]

 

It doesn't go nowhere, it goes where you didn't want it to go because you were expecting a dark energy ending (which is a total nonsense if you only played the game and didn't take care of the internet speculations).

 

WTF are you talking about?  I wasn't expecting the Dark Energy ending, nor have I ever actively supported it.  I mean, sure I expected there to be something about dark energy given there were several references about it in ME2, but that's just another example of "plot point that goes nowhere"

 

 

 

 
With low expectations we don't spend years saying that it's bad writing...

Demonstrably untrue 

 

 

 

 

I agree and the Wachowski are an example. They do "complex" stories but in my opinion, they don't succeed. But they try so I don't criticize that point. And I'm glad they try.

Don't tell me you don't know that. You quote Mac Walters with "lots of speculation" and on the same document you've got that reference. It has been said again and again on this forum. You know that it's a reference. But actually I'm not sure that it's Matrix 3 ending, I think it's more the architect discussion the reference. That's why I don't think you're honest when you're saying that.

 

Doesn't make it any less funny.  Or ironic.  And after sinking a couple hundred dollars and a lot of time into a series, yeah I'm going to be p*ssed at such a spectacular failure.  Especially when Bioware essentially blames the player for not liking it.

 

 

 

It makes sense. If you don't understand, you should read Nietzsche. "Doesn't make sense", "pseudo intellectual" etc... all of these are just what people say because they don't want to think. It's easier to say that.
 

They also say it when something does'n t make sense.

 

I have read a little Nietzsche.  The ending choices have some very uncomfortable parallels

 

 

PS : "A strong argument for that can be made too. And part of the reason I dislike ME2'S opening." You dislike one of the few story part of Mass Effect 2, a very important part of the trilogy. Then why did you play Mass Effect 3, even with low expectations, if the story is not what you were expecting? Low expectations but 3 years hating the game while you admit that the story isn't what you like. That's strange, isn't it?

 Yes I dislike the opening to ME2.  It's a railroaded piece of "feelz" the off the protagonist in the opening scenes, only to immediately bring him/her back to life with Space Magic (which is rarely, if ever remarked upon) for no other reason that to separate Shepard from the crew and advance the timeline.  Death is a heavy subject.  and it was treated almost like a joke.

[DesioPL]

The cycle cannot be broken.

 

But it is broken! Bioware broke it two years ago.

[DesioPL]

 

I think, this explain everything, so go on continue. I will read.

[themikefest]

I prefer the original cut too. If only I didn't have the weird Liara flashback.

Yeah that bothered me too. I'm glad the extended cut fixed that. 

[Iakus]

It's more the case of trying to please everyone. We don't live in a utopia where everyone gets what they want and goes home satisfied. No business works like this. Not one. There will always be complaints and issues because human beings are not perfect by nature.

 

Brushing this off as "not being able to please everyone" is a bit of a mistake.  This is backlash to a degree seldom seen in the video game industry.  Heck it made mainstream press.  Sure dissatisfied customers are inevitable.  But this went way  beyond that.  And the cloud continues to hang over the franchsie.

[GalacticWolf5]

My problem with this is Shepard we knew is dead. this "NEW" Shepard is nothing more than a copy.

 

Omg... we already talked about this a few posts ago.

 

Shepard shall be just like the catalyst over time.

 

What? Why would Shepard become like the Catalyst?

 

The Reapers are used in the Paragon option path as the 'Galactic police force" This includes the Reaper Indoctrinated troops as we can see the Reapers use them as well.

 

Where are you getting this from? Nothing in the epilogue shows Shepard using the Reaper indoctrinated troops.

 

If you want your Shepard to use them, he does. If you don't want him to use them, he doesn't.

 

However if 'WE" controlled Shepard then we could show Shepard there is always another way, in which Anderson was right. yet this is NOT our Shepard, but an AI copy.

 

Riiight....

[GalacticWolf5]

In Control Shepard gains the collective knowledge of the Reapers. That is bound to change his outlook. Doesn't mean he's not Shepard anymore. It's like saying that Shepard is not himself anymore after the Prothean beacon and the Cipher which is not the case in the game.

 

^^ This.

 

There are so many Reapers out there. Obtaining all of their knowledge and memories at once would definitly change your outlook.

[Cheviot]

Brushing this off as "not being able to please everyone" is a bit of a mistake.  This is backlash to a degree seldom seen in the video game industry.  Heck it made mainstream press.  Sure dissatisfied customers are inevitable.  But this went way  beyond that.  And the cloud continues to hang over the franchsie.

Backlashes similar to this are seen constantly.  The backlash against COD and Assassin's Creed are practically yearly events. What amplified the ME3 backlash was Shepard's death; at the same time some players were sad about that, other players had been looking for a way to give Bioware and EA bloody noses for the Prothy DLC, and had been searching for some way to get back at them.  The two groups merged.

[angol fear]

WTF are you talking about?  I wasn't expecting the Dark Energy ending, nor have I ever actively supported it.  I mean, sure I expected there to be something about dark energy given there were several references about it in ME2, but that's just another example of "plot point that goes nowhere"

 

Did I write "the" dark energy ending? No, I wrote "a" dark energy ending which means that it's an ending about dark energy, not the idea Drew Karpyphyn talked about. In the trilogy, The dark energy is used for the crucible. How can it be more important? The way it's written in Mass Effect 3, we can't say it goes nowhere. The only way it could be more important is that the dark energy would be what the ending was about, otherwise what you said makes no sense. And you may say that the dark energy isn't developed in the narration of Mass Effect 3, well, it's as developed as it was in Mass Effect 2. In Mass Effect 2, there was three times "dark energy" (two people saying "dark energy" one time and one mission about that, that's all), that's not "several references" that could justify you're complaining about the fact that it goes "nowhere" (and as a part of the crucible it goes in the most important part of Mass Effect 3).

 

PS : and in Mass Effect 2 we could understand that the dark energy would have a role. There's nothing that could lead people to think that Mass Effect ending would be about that. In Mass Effect 3 the dark energy had a role. To think that it would be what the ending was about, it's the player's expectations/ interpretation. If there's a problem here, it's with your own expectations/ interpretations, not with the writing of the game.