2393 réponses à ce sujet

[Elhanan]

The biggest problem I have with the evac scene is why in the world is the Normandy doing the evac? It might just be a frigate, but it's a huge ship and it lands as close to the front line of a war zone as you can get. If Cortez is still alive, why isn't it the shuttle? Why can't it be Coates? Why can't it be the Mako you rode over there in? If you're going to have a scene that explains how your injured crew got back on the Normandy, there are ways to do it without having Harbinger's biggest target land right in front of him.

As I recall, the shuttle was shot down; in need of repairs. And since the Mako has to be dropped by the Normandy anyway, or travel a fairly good distance to get there, having the Normandy perform the evac appears to be the more efficient choice. It's not like it is Joker's first time to do this (ie; several times in the prior games).

[Monica21]

As I recall, the shuttle was shot down; in need of repairs. And since the Mako has to be dropped by the Normandy anyway, or travel a fairly good distance to get there, having the Normandy perform the evac appears to be the more efficient choice. It's not like it is Joker's first time to do this (ie; several times in the prior games).

 

Yeah, but there are multiple vehicles working to get you to the beam, and multiple shuttles in the area. And having Steve show up in a suddenly-repaired shuttle is less weird than a frigate landing in the middle of a London street with Harbinger sitting about 500 yards away.

[Natureguy85]

As I recall, the shuttle was shot down; in need of repairs. And since the Mako has to be dropped by the Normandy anyway, or travel a fairly good distance to get there, having the Normandy perform the evac appears to be the more efficient choice. It's not like it is Joker's first time to do this (ie; several times in the prior games).

 

The Normandy was a little busy fighting Reapers in the space battle. Were this about getting Shepard to the beam, you could argue that takes priority. However, it's about evacuating a few wounded soldiers when dozens are being killed. It also makes Shepard run the wrong way.

[gothpunkboy89]

I am always for making up stuff that can explain the plot, so I don't have anything against gothpunkboy89's explanation here (although before, when it was the fan's fault, he readily admitted it was an absurdity, then he's trying to rationalize, it's comforting to see how at least people on this forum are consistent).

 

BUT there a couple of things to mention here:

- As you point out, just because we can come up with stuff why things might have worked, it still doesn't excuse that the writing team didn't tell us (and clearly never thought about it). Our efforts to repair this mess are fun for us but they are not part of this story, so don't make the writing any better.

- The fact that Harby doesn't shoot the Normandy isn't even my biggest problem with that scene. As gothpunkboy89 shows, it would have been easy for the writers to come up with some technobabble to make that work. No, there are two bigger problems, one small one and one big one:

The small one: If the Normandy could just fly to the beam, why not deliver troops there in the first place. I can rationalize this one away by assuming that somehow the situation changed (destroyer taken out, maybe more reaper air forces taken out at the time, ground atatck in progress) that allowed this but still, this is not made clear either.

The big problem: Why does Shepard even call for an evac at this point? During my game, my squad mates go down all the time during combat. I just finish the enemies of and rely on their suit's in build medical systems to revive them after the battle is done. I never call the Normandy for evac, it's not even an option for Shepard. And that's just the normal game, where often, evac might even be feasible and when there is no big time constraint. Now, here, we are at the end of all things. It is hammered down time and time again that "this is it". We make our good byes and everyone is clearly ready to die for the cause with the entire galaxy at steak (sorry, Shepard pun, had to be there ). Shepard is running toward Harbinger himself, but he made it, he is basically through the beam already but this is the point where he turns around and has the brilliant idea to call in the Normandy, which at the time is engulfed in the space battle that is going on overhead. What?!?

This is clearly not Shepard, this is some writer saying "hey, we messed this thing up before, how do we fix it with just adding 5 lines?"

 

And you are right gothpunkboy89, in retrospect, it might have been better not to "fix" it at all or to just let those two squad mates die but to quote Adam Jenson, we (the fans) never asked for this, we just stated the true fact that there was no explanation for the squad mates to get to the Normandy (among many other things). Saying that the fans are responsible for the evac scene as it happened, now THAT is absurd.

 

 

Before Harbinger shows up it does show multiple Reapers breaking off the attack and heading towards Earth. Which Hackett  tells any available ships to break off the attack and delay those Reapers.  Since it would be an atmosphere fight only Frigates and maybe Cruisers could deal with this as any larger ship wouldn't be able to break free of the atmosphere.  This would put the Normandy in the area to respond to an evac call. Like wise the now multiple ships in the air above the beam would provide more targets for the AA guns to focus on. Letting the Normandy with the stealth system sneak in. It didn't drop any troops due to the fact it was focusing on space battles only being called into orbit to delay the Reapers heading towards the beam.

 

 

2 minute mark shows multiple Reapers heading towards Hammer (Shepard) And Hackett ordering any one who can delay them. 

 

Combine that with possibility of the structures around the beam needed to keep the beam in tact it would sum up how and why things happened as they did.

[MrFob]

That's all fair enough but I am not sure why this a response to my previous post.

[themikefest]

The biggest problem I have with the evac scene is why in the world is the Normandy doing the evac? It might just be a frigate, but it's a huge ship and it lands as close to the front line of a war zone as you can get. If Cortez is still alive, why isn't it the shuttle? Why can't it be Coates? Why can't it be the Mako you rode over there in? If you're going to have a scene that explains how your injured crew got back on the Normandy, there are ways to do it without having Harbinger's biggest target land right in front of him.

I like to hear an explanation from BioWare how Steve managed to get back on the Normandy instead of the 2 squadmates

 

There was no need for the evac scene, Just have a shuttle pick up both squadmates. That is what I figured happened behind Shepard's back as she/he was shooting the 4 uglies

 

The Normandy has two shuttles. If Steve takes one to London, the other one is used to take the others to the forward operating base. What happens if the player does a playthrough with only James, edibot and Liara? If James and Liara are with Shepard, how does edibot get to London? Is it able to fly the shuttle itself? Simple. Have some npc from the Normandy fly the shuttle to London.

 

If Steve isn't talked to on the Citadel, he dies over London. And of course he survives if Shepard spoke to him.

 

If Steve survives, the shuttle crashes near the fob. It crashes in an area without any uglies around. He's able to make his way to the fob. Steve is seen at the fob with a couple of minor injuries. What this does is it gives Steve a goodbye in person with Shepard instead of the holobye.

 

Steve, if alive, sees Harbinger fly away. At this point, both squadmates could call for a shuttle or Steve reacts by getting the others in the shuttle and heading to the beam.  The shuttle arrives. As the two squadmates get in the shuttle, one of them turns around to see Shepard made it to the beam with Anderson close behind.

 

What that does is give confirmation that two people made it up the beam. In the game there's no way to know who sent the message to Hackett saying someone made it to the beam if everyone at that point was falling back and saying no one made it to the beam.

 

I have posted the above several times before in other threads.

[Elhanan]

Yeah, but there are multiple vehicles working to get you to the beam, and multiple shuttles in the area. And having Steve show up in a suddenly-repaired shuttle is less weird than a frigate landing in the middle of a London street with Harbinger sitting about 500 yards away.

And seeing as Steve could possibly die from said crash might mean that his injuries were severe enough to prohibit making the run himself. Personally, this is much ado about nothing; have never balked at this notion given the past history.

Back to the topic, still prefer Synthesis over Destruction.

[Monica21]

Personally, this is much ado about nothing; have never balked at this notion given the past history.

If was a response to an ongoing discussion about the evac scene. Just because you hadn't previously contributed doesn't mean no one can talk about it.

[Elhanan]

If was a response to an ongoing discussion about the evac scene. Just because you hadn't previously contributed doesn't mean no one can talk about it.

And I did; simply think the discussion lacks substance, and said so. My prerogative, I believe.

[Monica21]

And I did; simply think the discussion lacks substance, and said so. My prerogative, I believe.

And then proceeded to repeat the very substantive, "Synthesis ftw" argument. How nice for you to insert yourself in such a way.

[themikefest]

Back to the topic, still prefer Synthesis over Destruction.

That's right. Back to the topic

 

Destroy over merging. OUTSTANDING

[KaiserShep]

And seeing as Steve could possibly die from said crash might mean that his injuries were severe enough to prohibit making the run himself. Personally, this is much ado about nothing; have never balked at this notion given the past history.

Back to the topic, still prefer Synthesis over Destruction.

 

 

It probably wouldn't cost a whole lot of zots to have an interchangeable pilot voice to stand in for Cortez in case he's dead. But then I think that the companions and the rest of hammer should have been holding against a reaper monster onslaught rather than ducking giant death beams. 

 

As for Synthesis, well, I suppose there's no accounting for taste, but besides its presentation, the substance of it just doesn't make any dang sense. Like, people are totally incapable of understanding, so they must be augmented to "surgically" implant it? What tomfoolery is this? 

[Iakus]

 
Back to the topic, still prefer Synthesis over Destruction.

 

 

That's right. Back to the topic

 

Destroy over merging. OUTSTANDING

None of the above.  They all suck

[themikefest]

None of the above.

destroy from above
 

They all suck

I agree about blue and green.

The only part I don't like about destroy is Shepard having to shoot at the tube while walking towards it.

[Elhanan]

And then proceeded to repeat the very substantive, "Synthesis ftw" argument. How nice for you to insert yourself in such a way.

And you're welcome.

Was not aware I was to run proper posting procedure past anyone. Use Ignore; it may be easier than trying to correct all those that disagree with you.

[Monica21]

And you're welcome.

Was not aware I was to run proper posting procedure past anyone. Use Ignore; it may be easier than trying to correct all those that disagree with you.

Which is exactly what you did to me when you claimed the conversation was not substantive. Congratulations on the hypocrisy.

[Xisuthros]

I understand that synthesis and control have some moral issues with them, but both are much, much better options than outright genocide of an innocent (yes, the Geth are essentially innocent, even though they have a history of making dumb mistakes when their backs are against the wall) people. Given the choice between making some people upset about some non-invasive cybernetics and murdering an entire species, I fail to see why anyone would choose the latter option.

[BloodyMares]

Talking toasters are so special that it's worth jeopardizing the mission, yeah. Hello, who blew up the whole system of batarians to prevent the Reapers from returning? Commander Shepard. What is a few synthetics in comparison to that?

[Elhanan]

Talking toasters are so special that it's worth jeopardizing the mission, yeah. Hello, who blew up the whole system of batarians to prevent the Reapers from returning? Commander Shepard. What is a few synthetics in comparison to that?

So if a species does not fit into Shepard's defined parameters of life, it should be exterminated? And folks are giving my Shepard a hard time for inclusive DNA....

[Artona]

 

 

So if a species does not fit into Shepard's defined parameters of life, it should be exterminated?

 

No, it's just necessary sacrifice. 

[Elhanan]

No, it's just necessary sacrifice.

Not when one is offered other options.

[themikefest]

Not when one is offered other options.

Only if your ems is high enough to get your green stuff. Even with the lowest ems, destroy is far better than the merger

[KaiserShep]

I understand that synthesis and control have some moral issues with them, but both are much, much better options than outright genocide of an innocent (yes, the Geth are essentially innocent, even though they have a history of making dumb mistakes when their backs are against the wall) people. Given the choice between making some people upset about some non-invasive cybernetics and murdering an entire species, I fail to see why anyone would choose the latter option.

 

 

I know some folks might consider this a bit petty, but self preservation, to me, is a pretty powerful factor here. If I was standing there making this decision, and I absolutely had to die to facilitate 2 of the 3 options, I'd pick the option that doesn't automatically end in my demise without hesitation. I wouldn't kill myself for the robots, and I wouldn't kill myself for the Normandy's computer, whether or not I befriended it. Heck I wouldn't really die for any of the alien species throughout the galaxy either. I don't want to kill the geth or EDI, but I'd do so in a heartbeat to kill the reapers. 

[themikefest]

Having the geth get destroyed when destroy is chosen doesn't bother me since most of the time I let the quarians destroy them over Rannoch.

[Deager]

Having the geth get destroyed when destroy is chosen doesn't bother me since most of the time I let the quarians destroy them over Rannoch.

 

And this is why the discussions on the endings the game in general get really tricky. If the geth are destroyed, then the destroy ending only leaves EDI. I think I'd take out EDI instead of risk the other options given what Shepard could possibly know at the time.

 

We're all going to have different views and experience with this game. I attempt to roll play my Shepards as best I can and in that light, every ending has been used when I play because the rationale of Shep can vary that much; to me at least.

 

Side note; I wonder how much the moderators chuckle at the same discussions as they confirm we're not breaking rules.