Before I get to replies, I think we need to focus less on what and more on why. If there is swearing, violence, nudity, or whatever, is it there to serve a purpose such as realism, or is it there for shock value or just because? For example, I have never liked the "Don't f**k with Aria," line because the emphasis and camera being zoomed in on her mouth screamed to me that it was just Bioware saying "Hey, we say f**k now." This was strengthened by Aria doing absolutely nothing.
Under PEGI there's no real direct equivalent to the ESRB 'AO' rating... if a UK site says a game is for "Adults Only" that doesn't have the same connotations as the 'AO' rating even it if it's kinda the same thing, it just means it's got an 18 rating. There's no special PEGI rating for gambling/porn games which is pretty much what 'AO' equates to... so Strip Poker Prostitutes 7 (no, I don't know whether that exists) would have the same rating as Mass Effect 3.
There's no real distinction in the UK. There's no alternative to 'AO' here. A PEGI 18 rating is as close to an 'Adult Only' rating that we've got.
Despite coming from he UK, the article references the ESRB not PEGI and uses the ESRB terminology. The post I replied to also used the ESRB terminology.
The brood mother was rather a mixed bag. I found the path leading up to it, with Hespith's poem and confession to be incredibly dark and creepy. The brood mother herself...not so much. It was a boss fight with nipples. A lot of nipples.
The Grey Warden Joining was well done. THough I turn off persistent gore so I don't know how much blood spatter is standard.
The poem and lead up to the brood mother was indeed very creepy. I thought the brood mother was pretty gross and the fear is more the fact that it used to be a dwarf, not the creature itself.
I also turn off the persistent gore because it looked so bad. It was like paint.
Why did my post get deleted? 
It smelled bad.
And the intent in ME is frequently that of sadism, the whole point of fighting for the Quarian fleet, fighting for the end of the world, fighting for earth. If synthesis was ultimately just a byproduct of natural evolution, why were they even fighting anyway? It was just accelerated evolution, the entire purpose of ME3 is thrown away because it's all just an accelerated state, well except for all those bodies along the way to make that resolution.
Maybe Shepard and co. should of sat down with Sovereign for a drink and tea and conversation but instead it was all "you can't tell me what to do!" And yet he ultlimately did what they wanted anyway, but there's all sorts of random soldiers and workers that you pushed out of windows before you ultimately got to that point.
The ME series is literred with unnecessary conflict and drama that can only be precisely traced for an actual interest in it.
In fact, pretty much most of the planetary exploration and dominance post ME1 was thinly tied to an issue of borrowing of mercenary fighting for artificial body parts, but there is nothing there to condition means or ends, and even the collector's intents and goals could be conflated with those of the Reapers to the point where all you really have is a bloodbath,.
I mean Jon Snow escaped the Wildings with pretty much no shirt off his back, did he ever kill a single crow? No. Shepard wallows around sticking it to people left and right all for "humanity," when humanity had already agreed upon and accepted the original council and spectre organization. It's pretty hard to believe with inter-stellar light technology and communication and the flimsiest of bodyguards (Miranda who falls for you within the first half), that this couldn't have been re-arranged into something other than a full slate of domination and clubbing.
We don't know that Synthesis is a byproduct of natural evolution. The concept isn't brought up until the end of the game and it's presented by our enemy whose entire premise is wrong and whom I want to destroy the entire time he's talking because he's the bad guy.
As to the bold section, are you serious? He's supposed to sit down and converse with someone who says "You're inferior and I'm going to destroy you."? As far as Shepard ultimately doing what he wants, not really. Synthesis wasn't the plan, and likely not even a thought, when that scene was made.
The interpretation of synthesis was quite clear, it is an ultimate state, higher evolution, it was the "true third path" offered in many CnC games.
If the developers themselves were encouraging it, it's hard not to take it seriously as such.
Destruction and dominion (particularly in the absence of an alternative such synthesis) is offered clearly to denote overt sadism and the kind of traditional "evil" path offered in CnC games.
I say traditional because in many other games or at times such as with SWTOR the sith path can mean so many things, sometimes it's greed, sometime's it's just fulfilling a different organization's objectives, and so on and so forth.
The overt genocidal prospects of the Reapers were only explicit in the first game.
The issue of resistance and necessity is blurred because of the shifting trajectories of the games themselves, but by the end of ME3, they essentially are postulated as a non-threat.
Yes, Synthesis was clearly meant to be the "golden ending" but it was awful and stupid. That's one of the major problems with the ending. Just because the writers intended it to be best doesn't mean a player can't legitimately disagree and make a different choice based on non-sadistic motives. And even within the endings themselves; while I may consider even Paragon control to be extremely problematic, it's clear at least Paragon Shepard-Catalyst has honorable motivations.
If humanity and everyone had done nothing in ME3 but accept their destruction at the hands of the Reapers etc, their fate arguably did not change one iota from that point to the ultimate synthesis ending.
No, because Synthesis needed the Crucible.
Retour en haut
