82 réponses à ce sujet

[MrFob]

Okay, but that part of the audience seems to be a minority, and a heterogeneous one, just as you say. The sci-fi setting is mostly a means, not an end, used as a set-up, for example because it is exotic, as a means to achieve alienation or to generate some credibility for a fantasy idea. 
 
I also don't know of a story that used a scientific revelation as the climax (well, not counting MEEM, see below  ).

I can't think of many either, probably because it's not ideal to put the "scientific" revelations directly at the end of the story (I wouldn't have done it in MEEM either, that was just because of modding constraints). Usually, you will find those kinds of "more technical" revelations just before the last act of the story starts, the reason being that it gives the protagonist(s) enough time to act on what they learned. If you take that into account, ten there are many SciFi stories that work with this idea. Just as an arbitrary example, one of my favorite TV shows is called ReGenesis and they do it in almost every episode. It may not be for everyone but then, what is?
 

The "wow" aspects in the original ME:3 ending were supposed to be on a moral and emotional level: The reapers aren't evil (just not empathetic), they have a higher goal that concerns all life, and all possible ending choices have objectionable consequences (which, as you know, was reversed by the EC, for which synthethis is supposedly objectively the best, but the idea was clearly there and is a good one). A "bugfix" for the ending would remove or replace the metaphysics that destroys credibility, but retain these as the central ideas.  
 
Now I know why you wrote MEEM the way you did  , and if we had been script doctors at BioWare in 2011, this would have been my main point of criticism : That it does not simply replace the broken metaphysical sci-fi elements (and the catalyst character) with much more credible ones (and a more credible VI), but moves them to the center of the stage, where they also supersede the ideas that were supposed to engage players on a moral and emotional level.

Maybe, although I don't quite see what emotional aspect you really loose there. The catalyst in the original ending still doesn't bestow some emotional value on the premise, it's still just an exposition device, just for different exposition IMO. Shepard's possible actions and consequences also stay basically the same. But I will agree that the drama was not my first concern when writing the mod. That however may have been my fault alone because you can indeed combine great drama with complicated plots I think. It's difficult but it can be done (I'll have to point toward ReGenesis again, seriously, watch it ).
 

Do you like "The Physics of Star Trek", then?
 
But isn't that proof that this technobabble is just an arbitrary plot device like applied phlebotinum?  "Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from a completely ad-hoc plot device", see http://tvtropes.org/...liedPhlebotinum.
 
Ronald D. Moore decided for this very reason to get rid of it for "Battlestar Galactica", and I tend to agree that this was a good decision 
 
I think one of the Star Trek producers or show runners once answered the question "how does the warp drive work?" with "good, thank you very much". In the same sense, the very topic of this thread is probably off-topic from the point of view of the writers, because the ending never was about engaging people with the question whether or not the sci-fi metaphysics that sets the stage is credible or not...

 
Honestly, it's been ages since I watched TNG or read anything about it. But back in the nineties I did have one book about the physics of Star Trek and I loved it.
 
I guess the point is that "good" technobabble should not be arbitrary. If you assign certain aspects to, say, the use of antimatter for example (needs to be kept within force fields to prevent it from reacting with matter uncontrolled and explode, needs to react in a controlled way in a dilithium crystal matrx to generate power, is still a valuable recourse that is tough to generate in special facilities, etc.), than you need to stick to it and if you can base your technobabble on real science and theoretical concepts as much as possible except for the few freedoms that you allow yourself to put the fi into scifi, then all the better. If the author bothered to put that much detail into their lore, they should not be afraid to have their characters use them in dialogue. And don't worry about that snappy producer, as long as the writers (and - if they have them - their science advisers) know how they imagine the warp core to work and the associated rules, that's enough.
 
Of course you can skip it. In BSG no one cares how the ship jumps, it just does. I don't dispute that this works. Personally, I find it less to my taste though. I watched BSG and I liked it mainly for it's visuals and some of the characters. ST:TNG, I liked despite the fact that it barely had any fancy visuals (until late in the series) but rather because of the premises of the plots.
 
Mass Effect is a bit weird in the sense that it kind of caters to both audiences. If you just play the game, it's more like BSG. But then, there is also the layer of the codex and galaxy map descriptions which go more in the TNG direction. That is something, only an interactive medium can do, where the audience can choose which parts of the content they want to consume and which they want to skip.
 
If we consider the codex side of things, I definitely did expect a science related revelation and solution but if we consider the purely action and character focused game narrative without that background, a purely emotional and dramatic climax would have been appropriate. Unfortunately, I think the catalyst as it is in the original ending doesn't really satisfy on either count. It fails to generate a plausible pseudo-science scenario and it also fails at generating a scenario that emotionally resonated with me.

[Tim van Beek]

Maybe, although I don't quite see wht emotional aspect you really loose there. The catalyst in the original ending still doesn't bestow some emotional value on the premise...

I didn't intend to say that MEEM loses anything, because I agree with you that the original catalyst scene is pretty much void of emotion, too, but that that's an aspect that MEEM does not improve.

 

 

 (I'll have to point toward ReGenesis again, seriously, watch it ).

Will do, commander! 

 

Well, I'll add it to my list. It does seem to have had a real scientific consultant. Speaking of which: Just started to watch Interstellar, mostly because it also seems to linger somewhere in the sci-fi realm that you like, and Kip Thorne was advising. Seemingly he fought hard to prevent Nolan from introducing FTL travel  . And he told the artists how a wormhole would actually look like. But obviously every consultant has limited influence: The characters have just landed on a planet with such crushing gravity that one hour there is supposed to be seven years on Earth. But somehow they survive and even can move just like on Earth, only one character mentions that "the gravity is crushing"   

 

It seems to have done well, though, so maybe my assessment about the major interests of the audience was wrong.

 

Anyway, it would have been a great tribute to the 100th year old birthday party of general relativity this year.

 

 

Mass Effect is a bit weird in the sense that it kind of caters to both audiences. If you just play the game, it's more like BSG. But then, there is also the layer of the codex and galaxy map descriptions which go more in the TNG direction. That is something, only an interactive medium can do, where the audience can choose which parts of the content they want to consume and which they want to skip.

 
If we consider the codex side of things, I definitely did expect a science related revelation and solution but if we consider the purely action and character focused game narrative without that background, a purely emotional and dramatic climax would have been appropriate. Unfortunately, I think the catalyst as it is in the original ending doesn't really satisfy on either count. It fails to generate a plausible pseudo-science scenario and it also fails at generating a scenario that emotionally resonated with me.

That's the solution, right there!

The catalyst wakes up Shep, we get three plinks! for codex updates for "The Catalyst", "The Crucible", "The Ending", but jump right to the A, B, C, D ending choice via the dialogue wheel

[MrFob]

I didn't intend to say that MEEM loses anything, because I agree with you that the original catalyst scene is pretty much void of emotion, too, but that that's an aspect that MEEM does not improve.

This is true.
 

Will do, commander! 
 
Well, I'll add it to my list. It does seem to have had a real scientific consultant. Speaking of which: Just started to watch Interstellar, mostly because it also seems to linger somewhere in the sci-fi realm that you like, and Kip Thorne was advising. Seemingly he fought hard to prevent Nolan from introducing FTL travel  . And he told the artists how a wormhole would actually look like. But obviously every consultant has limited influence: The characters have just landed on a planet with such crushing gravity that one hour there is supposed to be seven years on Earth. But somehow they survive and even can move just like on Earth, only one character mentions that "the gravity is crushing" 
 
It seems to have done well, though, so maybe my assessment about the major interests of the audience was wrong.
 
Anyway, it would have been a great tribute to the 100th year old birthday party of general relativity this year.

Can you believe I haven't seen this movie yet? It's like the world conspires to prevent me from watching it. Whenever I wanted to go see it, something came up. It's definitely on my list though. Stopped reading your middle paragraph to avoid spoilers.
 

That's the solution, right there!
The catalyst wakes up Shep, we get three plinks! for codex updates for "The Catalyst", "The Crucible", "The Ending", but jump right to the A, B, C, D ending choice via the dialogue wheel

 There you go. Finally, we figured it out!

[Tim van Beek]

Alright, before bowing out of this thread:

 

On behalf of the fan base of ME: Thank you for your ending mods 

 

I hope you get to see Interstellar. And sorry for the spoilers  . Although it's not much of a spoiler, it is like saying the ME:A will be about a character shooting aliens, I mean, come on! 

[MrFob]

Yea, thanks for that discussion TvB! It was definitely one of the most memorable ones I have had on these boards. And no worries about those (maybe non)spoilers. I just got paranoid and stopped, it's always tough to know ahead of time how bad it's gonna get.

 

And if you ever get to watch ReGenesis, we can talk about it in the off topic secti ... aaahhh, still making that mistake.

[Ieldra]

Weellll.....I decided to pop in and look what's going on here for a minute. I think smudboy's videos are overthinking it and I don't like his tone, but MrBtongues' videos, they hit the mark.

 

It's been more than three years, but if anything, ME3's ending appears even worse from a distance. Back then, the emotional turmoil it created was at the forefront, but now, with a distance of three years, all the things that don't make sense stand out clearly. I recall I was quite delighted when the EC came out, but in hindsight, that was not because the endings were now good (even though I said so at the time), but because they were emotionally bearable at last. In terms of storytelling, the end of ME3 remains a confusing mess that hurts your head if you start to think about it. 

 

What is "MEEM", btw? I only recall "MEHEM".

[Natureguy85]

Weellll.....I decided to pop in and look what's going on here for a minute. I think smudboy's videos are overthinking it and I don't like his tone, but MrBtongues' videos, they hit the mark.

 

It's been more than three years, but if anything, ME3's ending appears even worse from a distance. Back then, the emotional turmoil it created was at the forefront, but now, with a distance of three years, all the things that don't make sense stand out clearly. I recall I was quite delighted when the EC came out, but in hindsight, that was not because the endings were now good (even though I said so at the time), but because they were emotionally bearable at last. In terms of storytelling, the end of ME3 remains a confusing mess that hurts your head if you start to think about it. 

 

What is "MEEM", btw? I only recall "MEHEM".

 

Smudboy does spend too much time on a few minor points but his videos are largely spot on. However, Mr.Btongue's are definitely the best out there.

[Matthias King]

 
Nah, he was like that even before ME3 was released.
 
But, I just realized I only commented on smudboy and not on the issue. Because I think on the issue the OP raised, I may disagree with smudboy but I would also argue that there are some issues there.
The first is that, while the Geth-Quarian issue does not necessarily contradict the catalyst logically, there is a narrative problem in reviving a closed story arc. The issue of synthetics vs. organics was effectively concluded on Rannoch and we even got to make a choice to imprint our stance on that matter onto the outcome. In the ending, this arc is now not taken up again but rather recycled in order to be slapped onto the main plot. This si not very elegant and to make matters worse, Shepard cannot even bring up the geth-quarian example in the conversation with the catalyst. I am not saying that Shep should have been able to convince the catalyst with this example but from Shep's perspective - if the player made piece on Rannoch - this must have been very relevant. It certainly is relevant to me as a player. I don't necessarily expect the catalyst to agree with me but the fact that Rannoch is not even brought up is jarring at best and further elevates my disconnection with Shepard in this final conversation.
 
My second problem with this issue is that the reapers do think in such long terms, they are supposed to be overwhelming in their might and vast in their perspective. Yet, their raison d'être is apparently fear of the future. They cannot have proof for the problem they are projecting to happen eventually, otherwise there would be no organics around. They also cannot predict the future very accurately or destroy (which ultimately contradicts their goals) or the stargazer scene in refurse (which implies their defeat) would never have been possible. Therefore, they invent a problem, claim that it is inevitable and then they are so afraid of it that they enforce stagnation on the galaxy. This is not exactly the mindset of infinite awe that ME1/2 so expertly set us up to expect. What happened to "beyond the comprehension" of us little beings "fumbling in ignorance"? Their reasons are easy to comprehend and despite the huge scale on which they are able to operate actually rather pathetic.

 

That is the real problem with how the reapers are handled in my mind. It's not so much a plot hole* as it is an inelegant solution to a story that actually set up a scenario which could have produced any number of great endings.

 

 

*) There are still plot holes in this ending but that's another story for another thread.

Agreed. Well put. And to add to your point, another issue pertaining to inserting the 'organic vs. synthetic' conflict as the overarching plot of the entire series and the reaper's logic, the geth, via Legion, flat out state that they refused to wipe out their creators because they didn't want to and couldn't anticipate the effects of that decision if they chose to.

 

This is yet another well-established thing in the game's setting and history that utterly contradicts everything that BW retroactively tried to make the trilogy about.