841 réponses à ce sujet

[AlanC9]

I never finished that. How do they win?

[Linkenski]

To me, it doesn't matter whether the crucible is as cheap as something in other movies. If the opposing force is as overwhelming as the Reapers, I'd rather have a story about our limited survival or struggle last stand until we're killed than to have a plot device that negates the threat so much.

I liked the idea of the crucible not being cut out in what it does, and it not just being a reaper off switch, but what we got was still anything but satisfactory.

[Giga Drill BREAKER]

- A good Jornal and map systems

- A logical ending.

[Ahglock]

I don't mind the Crucible thing. It had to be. They'd set the Reapers up to be invincible to a conventional force. Protheans, Levianthans and countless other species had failed. Having us win in the same way everyone else could have tired would have been weak.

Frankly the spec ops mission idea sounds like what I thought we'd get which was some "....but maybe a small team can infiltrate the Reapers" and go all Independence Day on them or something. That is more direct but no less contrived, might as well just had a poorly defended exhaust port at that point.

I disagree. The big difference in this cycle and every previous cycle is the reapers had to fly here the old fashioned way. No teleport in crap.

One of the big reasons the protheans had such a hard time was the reapers appearing at the citadel taking out the central government and then being able to deal with small fleets system by system.

Thanks to ME1 and 2. You have some solid advantages.

1. Central government still intact.
2. Mass relay system controlled by citadel still intact.

No other cycle had those things and according to Vigil were key reasons the protheans lost.

Finally remember how you burn fuel every time you fly between systems without a mass relay. The reapers did that but from dark space far far far away. How much fuel did they burn getting here. They easily could have had them showing up at half power and more vulnerable.

Instead pretty much everything in ME1 and 2 was pointless. You just needed a magic gun.

Have the fleets,the alliances win the war. Have reasons and ways Shepard helps but don't have him win the war with a contrived plot device. It's okay for his actions to be the tipping point changing a narrow loss to a win but it's lame IMO to have him turn a absolute galactic curb stomp into a victory with a button push. Sure his alliance building etc can be what gets them to the 50:50 shot for the climatic final battle but don't have his actions in the final battle swing things more than 5-10%.

I'd be personally fine with a MEA that followed a team whoosh actions had no real impact on the big conflict. Yeah they did things here and there but the effects were more small scale. You saved these people, the damn did not break etc. And these things don't really impact the war or whatever is happening in A overall.

[AlanC9]

Finally remember how you burn fuel every time you fly between systems without a mass relay. The reapers did that but from dark space far far far away. How much fuel did they burn getting here. They easily could have had them showing up at half power and more vulnerable.

Only if the Reapers were very, very stupid. They don't have to arrive in Citadel-controlled space if they don't want to get into a war right away. They can enter some of the 90% of the galaxy that hasn't been explored and refuel there.

[Ahglock]

Only if the Reapers were very, very stupid. They don't have to arrive in Citadel-controlled space if they don't want to get into a war right away. They can enter some of the 90% of the galaxy that hasn't been explored and refuel there.

Because fuel depots are lying around for them? Best case scenario for them is this delays them years, probably decades. They may need to attack in order to grab existing fuel supplies.

[DaemionMoadrin]

Because fuel depots are lying around for them? Best case scenario for them is this delays them years, probably decades. They may need to attack in order to grab existing fuel supplies.

 

You can easily refuel using gas giants.

[themikefest]

 Even with the use of the relays and having the crucible, the reapers would've still harvested us, but Bioware made them stupid for us to defeat them. The only way to defeat the reapers is to find the plans for the device, build it and use it before the reapers entered the galaxy

[Ahglock]

You can easily refuel using gas giants.

I'm not sure gas giants really cover refueling a fleet of ships in short order. But whatever. I'm willing to concede the point even if the argument is reapers wouldn't do something stupid despite stupid act after stupid act throughout the story.

[Ahglock]

Even with the use of the relays and having the crucible, the reapers would've still harvested us, but Bioware made them stupid for us to defeat them. The only way to defeat the reapers is to find the plans for the device, build it and use it before the reapers entered the galaxy

I think that's my primary issue. The reapers are stupid powerful sure. But how stupid powerful is sort of up in the air until it's set in ME3.

We have sovereign as an example but is he a normal reaper a weak one a bad ass one we don't know. He's beat and we use his carcass for research and improve weapons and shields etc. How much? The Normandy wastes the collector ship pretty easily when upgraded and the Normandy isn't a huge warship. How does collector shields compare? We have the answers now, but in game the reapers are still pretty much an unknown until ME3.

There are dozens of steps through ME1 and 2 where they could have had the result in ME3 being the reapers are now beatable. But they went the unbeatable route making something like the crucible needed which we shouldn't have been able to pull off.

[In Exile]

Because fuel depots are lying around for them? Best case scenario for them is this delays them years, probably decades. They may need to attack in order to grab existing fuel supplies.

But the idea that they get weak if they aren't refueled isn't less of a magic doohickey (as Sidney put it). It's all a plot contrivance to make the seemingly unbeatable enemy actually beatable.

Whenever you have an Eldrich abomination as your enemy, you're ultimately going to either have to come up with a Load Bearing Boss contrivance (e.g. if you kill the archdemon all the darkapawn suddenly run away, Sovereign possess Saren so Shepard shooting stuff in the face can let the fleet win, etc.) or you get an anti-climatic ending like in DAI (where by the time you actually get to the supposed climax of the game you've already dismantled your enemy in every meaningful way).

[In Exile]

The fact that ME combat is braindead easy on even the highest SP difficulty doesn't make the statement "Shepard is an uber-badass who just slaughters his/her way through legions of enemies and who - apart from some sacrifices and drama - totally wins overhwelming victories" any less silly. It's pretty much to be expected that a trained N7 is going to murderize a bunch of mindless toasters, thralls and space zombies whose whole strategy seems to be more based around throwing themselves at you until you run out of bullets or get bored, than actually posing a challenge. Gameplay wise, many of the ME3 multiplayer characters are arguably even better than Shepard in this regard.

However, as I stated earlier in the thread you need either a conviniently placed space monster or a unique tech-magic laser hooked up to the largest fleet in the galaxy to take out even one of the hundred thousand or so baby Reapers in game. Billions of people still die no matter what you do, and you need a conveniently timed plot device to stand a chance of winning against the Reapers via either killing yourself, or every synthetic still active in the galaxy and destroying most of the tech and infrastructure that said galaxy's spacefairing societies are based around. That's not really an overwhelming victory.

Shepard's only outstanding ability in game is the persuasion mechanic.

You've completely missed the point. It's obvious Shepard isn't going to beat the Reapers by shooting them in the face - they're spaceships. It was obvious from the first moments of ME3 - when the Crucible is introduced - that the whole game was going to come down to pressing the reaper "OFF" button in dramatic fashion.

The problem is this: the game isn't able to sell that the victory is actually out of reach for Shepard because the entire game is set up as you sweeping in at the pivotal moment to snatch victories from the jaws of defeat. A more renegade playthrough creates a grittier game where you feel some cost to your actions - but just button mashing your way as a paragon through the game has you stumble from victory to victory.

The game isn't "build up a conventional army to beat up the reapers in a stand-up fight". It's "buy time for the Crucile". We all know the Crucible will work. Shepard winning his way at everything Crucible related IS dramatic victory, and it's overwhelming because you don't experience any setback until Thessia. And everyone rails against Thessia because the only reason there even IS a setback is cutscene magic.

The people who die are background props. We expect then all to die to sell the "epic" stakes of the game. It's like how Man of Steel just thoughtlessly leveled Metropolis to show off its stakes.

For Shepard to expedient setbacks - apart from the much maligned moment on Thessia - you as the player *have* to make a choice toward that end.

Otherwise, you succeed in all of your goals, get your space fleet, get your magical reaper OFF switch, and get ready to burst onto the scene at Earth for a dramatic showdown.

For a single mook with a peashooter facing a legion of Eldrich abominations that eradicated more than 1/3rd of the military might of the Alliance in about 10 minutes, everything Shepard does is nothing less than a miracle. What you're failing to account for is just how overwhelmingly invincible the reapers are portrayed to be when considering just how victorious Shepard's actions are vs. everyone else.

[Ahglock]

Everything is a plot device so it being one isn't the issue. Though I think you are focussing on the specific example too much and not the point I apparently am not making well.

You had 2 games worth if missions where you try to hinder/stop/weaken the reapers before they arrive. You know maybe have them weakened, have you be stronger in comparison m. From not seizing the citadel in the first moment of invasion, to you having reaper cannons on your ships they can become beatable. The problem is people keep making them elder gods when they are just big robot ships with more advanced tech. You've taken steps to narrow tech gap, you've removed the tactical advantage of controlling the relays all things no other cycle has done. Insert dozens of other missions in here. Don't make them unbeatable when ME3 rolls around. It wasn't necessary.

[In Exile]

Everything is a plot device so it being one isn't the issue. Though I think you are focussing on the specific example too much and not the point I apparently am not making well.

You had 2 games worth if missions where you try to hinder/stop/weaken the reapers before they arrive. You know maybe have them weakened, have you be stronger in comparison m. From not seizing the citadel in the first moment of invasion, to you having reaper cannons on your ships they can become beatable. The problem is people keep making them elder gods when they are just big robot ships with more advanced tech. You've taken steps to narrow tech gap, you've removed the tactical advantage of controlling the relays all things no other cycle has done. Insert dozens of other missions in here. Don't make them unbeatable when ME3 rolls around. It wasn't necessary.

I don't disagree with you. I'm just saying "and suddenly they're weak now" isn't any less of a contrivance than "magic OFF button". The counter here is to just say, well, what if Bioware set up the Crucible since ME1?

Bioware was silly in making the reapers so overpowered in ME3.

[AlanC9]

Because fuel depots are lying around for them? Best case scenario for them is this delays them years, probably decades. They may need to attack in order to grab existing fuel supplies.

The Reapers haven't invented fuel scoops? Funny; we have.

And what if it does take years?

[Dantriges]

No space.

 

Well, the galaxy took auto cooling features out of their guns after refitting them with thermal clips.

 

I think everyone knows that the Reapers had overwhelming military might.

[themikefest]

I think that's my primary issue. The reapers are stupid powerful sure. But how stupid powerful is sort of up in the air until it's set in ME3.

We have sovereign as an example but is he a normal reaper a weak one a bad ass one we don't know. He's beat and we use his carcass for research and improve weapons and shields etc. How much? The Normandy wastes the collector ship pretty easily when upgraded and the Normandy isn't a huge warship. How does collector shields compare? We have the answers now, but in game the reapers are still pretty much an unknown until ME3.

There are dozens of steps through ME1 and 2 where they could have had the result in ME3 being the reapers are now beatable. But they went the unbeatable route making something like the crucible needed which we shouldn't have been able to pull off.

Their power lies in their numbers. Here's a post explaining the possible number of reapers they have

 

Here's a post about how stupid they really are in this cycle

[Dantriges]

Perhaps they can´t fire horizontally?  

[themikefest]

Perhaps they can´t fire horizontally?  

The destroyer in London can

[Hiemoth]

I don't disagree with you. I'm just saying "and suddenly they're weak now" isn't any less of a contrivance than "magic OFF button". The counter here is to just say, well, what if Bioware set up the Crucible since ME1?

Bioware was silly in making the reapers so overpowered in ME3.

 

You didn't feel the Reapers in ME3 didn't fit in with the fleets needed to take out one Reaper in ME1? Really?

[Dantriges]

The destroyer in London can

 

He paid 10k Eezo for the optional upgrade of course.   Yeah ok, they are dumb.

[In Exile]

You didn't feel the Reapers in ME3 didn't fit in with the fleets needed to take out one Reaper in ME1? Really?

I'm having a bit of a hard time parsing the double negative, but yes. Or rather, there are two things that I think were unrelated to ME1 and errors: the sheer number of reapers and the technological stagnation of the Council races. There wasn't a particular need for ME2 (and ME3) to be set within 3 years of ME1, and there was no need to keep the galaxy at a point of stasis weapons wise.

In the same way that having the Council backtrack on the reaper threat wasn't necessary in ME2.

Beyond that, we already had a reaper OFF switch: killing the reaper avatar while coordinating with a fleet.

[DaemionMoadrin]

This might be relevant:

 

http://www.dorkly.co...tion-vs-reality

[Batarian Master Race]

I never finished that. How do they win?

Clever tactics and calling in support from lots and lots of friends.

[In Exile]

Clever tactics and calling in support from lots and lots of friends.

So, reinforcements and being on a sufficiently similar technological plane that conventional victory was possible?

That's not what Bioware allowed in ME3.