We could also talk about what makes a less ridiculous story. Especially when SHepard (and the galaxy as a whole) wastes so much time not working on a way to stop them.
If anything, they made them far more numerous, by confirming that the Leviathan of Dis was a Reaper, not a Farscape easter egg.
The Reapers don't seem to be that numerous. We don't see thousands of them at Earth, for instance, and their combat performance in the war isn't what you'd expect if there really were several hundred Sovereigns running around.
But yeah, we can talk about a hypothetical rewrite where some sort of conventional victory works. I don't see how we get there without starting earlier than ME3, though. Honestly, I'm not sold on CV being workable story-wise in the first place. Unless we're planning to end the story in the middle of the war the way Star Wars Ep. 6 did.
^Couldn't that be attributed to our improved technology via Sovereign's corpse in the time since ME1? I don't think we necessarily need to retcon ME2's final slide to say that our own ships have improved enough to the point where, while we still don't have a chance in hell, we're more able to offer resistance.
Yeah, because they don't thrive by retaining their purely organic form in any other ending
I don't recall saying anything different, though it seems that in Synthesis, the cultures of the Milky Way seem to be making greater strides; but as you say, all of them are generally positive (except low-EMS endings of course). It's also good to see you're seeing the positives in the Synthesis endings now.
^Couldn't that be attributed to our improved technology via Sovereign's corpse in the time since ME1? I don't think we necessarily need to retcon ME2's final slide to say that our own ships have improved enough to the point where, while we still don't have a chance in hell, we're more able to offer resistance.
Between the improved tech and the introduction of the destroyer class, yeah, we can get to someplace like the ME3 situation easily enough. Dreadnought and capital-class reapers being approximately equal in numbers works, since even with improved techs a Citadel dreadnought is much weaker than one capital-class Reaper. It's getting any further than that which would be the problem.
The Reapers don't seem to be that numerous. We don't see thousands of them at Earth, for instance, and their combat performance in the war isn't what you'd expect if there really were several hundred Sovereigns running around.
But yeah, we can talk about a hypothetical rewrite where some sort of conventional victory works. I don't see how we get there without starting earlier than ME3, though. Honestly, I'm not sold on CV being workable story-wise in the first place. Unless we're planning to end the story in the middle of the war the way Star Wars Ep. 6 did.
Even if we don't seem them on the screen, there should be tens of thousands of Sovereign-class Reapers alone. Not including destroyers, troop transports, slaughter ships, drones, etc. Just going by how long they've been harvesting.
But yes, theri performance doesn't match that. Or even the just a few hundred Reapers. Their performance was grossly incompetent by any measurement.
And of course, it all depends on how one defines "conventional victory" the reductio ad absurdum crowd seems to think that such a victory is nothing more than charging headlong into massed Reaper fire and somehow surviving. But there are far more "unconventional" strategies besides "throw everything we have into a magic wand and Avara Kadavara the Reapers"
But I have never claimed ME2's story was all that great (or even that ME2 had much of a story to begin with) so yeah, you'd have to go that far at least to lay the groundwork for such a story.
I don't recall saying anything different, though it seems that in Synthesis, the cultures of the Milky Way seem to be making greater strides; but as you say, all of them are generally positive (except low-EMS endings of course). It's also good to see you're seeing the positives in the Synthesis endings now.
If by "positives" you mean "chilling implications" then yes.
Actually, despite the abruptness, and not quite what I hoped for, ending of ME3, I did kind of like it. I mean, I actually felt some closure (greatly aided by the Director's Cut), and I don't feel like it left too many questions unanswered. Did I like the answers? Not all of them, but at least there were answers.
Who's actually saying that? I was talking like the MEU was deliberately set up so that the Reapers can't be beaten conventionally,
That really wasn't until ME3 though and they couldn't even be consistent there. The Rannoch Reaper withstood an entire fleet's barrage and needed several internal hits, the Hades Cannon, which sure looks like a Destroyer Reaper, went down with one Cain hit, and the one protecting the beam was stumbled by two missiles and finished by grenade launchers or something. I don't care what the hell a Thanix missile actually is, but I have a hard time believing it's stronger than capital ship mounted mass accelerator cannons. Of course, they also seem to have forgotten the best overhead conversation in the series and what would happen every time a ship missed and hit the planet;
Also recall that central to the Reapers' strategy is to shut down the relay network and isolate systems. You don't need a divide and conquer strategy if you can take out the combined force. In fact, it would be beneficial to corral them all together so you can win and be done with it. And no, this idea does not fix the plot hole of the Reapers not immediately taking the Citadel because the Reapers always do the divide and conquer strategy except this time. Unless we have some reason to think the Prothean Cycle was the exception there.
Anyway, the writers already adjusted Reaper strength way down from ME2. A few dozen Sovereigns at ME1 strength would curbstomp the Citadel fleets handily, and ME2 showed a couple of hundred of the things. ME3 made them both somewhat weaker and potentially far less numerous (since a large proportion of the ME2 Reapers could be retconned down to destroyer size.)
That's only because the galaxy did almost nothing in the two years that Shepard was gone and because the game never demonstrated the wide spread of the Thanix Cannon. While I always thought it was silly, the codex says that even Fighters have this thing now. While obviously it would have less effect than the one on the Normandy, that would change the balance of power considerably.
As I'm sure it's been said, the Reapers are however strong or numerous as the writers want them to be.
It was probably a mistake to make one Reaper the match of several fleets in ME 1.
No, that was fine. The mistake was making the fact that they killed one and had over two years to reverse engineer technology not matter.
The Reapers don't seem to be that numerous. We don't see thousands of them at Earth, for instance, and their combat performance in the war isn't what you'd expect if there really were several hundred Sovereigns running around.
But yeah, we can talk about a hypothetical rewrite where some sort of conventional victory works. I don't see how we get there without starting earlier than ME3, though. Honestly, I'm not sold on CV being workable story-wise in the first place. Unless we're planning to end the story in the middle of the war the way Star Wars Ep. 6 did.
Well remember that the Reapers are hitting many systems at once rather than going system by system as Vigil describes.
You would have to start writing back in ME2. Don't have the galaxy do almost nothing for 2+ years and have the Thanix Cannon actually mean something to the war effort. I wouldn't be automatically against ending it in the middle of the war as you describe. The first Matrix movie could have been stand alone and ended the story just fine. The next two movies were not required and were made because people wanted more, which explains why they are not nearly as good.
Please, if you DON'T talk about "The possibile End" than stop highjack the thread.
Please open a new one. You can post than the link here.
Fair enough but comparison to the end of the earlier entry is useful in discussing what we want in the next.
I thought I did mention some things but I can't find the post so maybe it didn't go through.
1) Choices matter to the ending. Bad endings are acceptable if it's my fault and I could, and perhaps should have seen it coming.
2) Don't take control away from the protagonist. We need to win and not simplyhave the villain quit unless we convinced them to quit because of our awesome charisma, like Saren or President EDEN from Fallout 3, and then only if that charisma has been a thing throughout the story, as it was with Shepard.
3) Make the end fit the story. The main themes should resound in the ending, not be changed to something different, even if that something different was a sub-theme.
If by "positives" you mean "chilling implications" then yes.
If by "chilling implications" you mean "the implications for the galaxy to chill out together," then I'd broadly agree, but I still think there's opportunity for conflict.
That really wasn't until ME3 though and they couldn't even be consistent there. The Rannoch Reaper withstood an entire fleet's barrage and needed several internal hits, the Hades Cannon, which sure looks like a Destroyer Reaper, went down with one Cain hit, and the one protecting the beam was stumbled by two missiles and finished by grenade launchers or something. I don't care what the hell a Thanix missile actually is, but I have a hard time believing it's stronger than capital ship mounted mass accelerator cannons.
Yeah, the Earth destroyer went down easier that the Rannoch Reaper. Mostly that's a problem with the Rannoch sequence. Boss fights usually make things worse.
Of course, they also seem to have forgotten the best overhead conversation in the series and what would happen every time a ship missed and hit the planet
That's the same problem every other space battle scene in the trilogy has. Making the scene look correct would have made it look less cool. To some extent this is a problem with the audience, and Bio's just going along with us.
Also recall that central to the Reapers' strategy is to shut down the relay network and isolate systems. You don't need a divide and conquer strategy if you can take out the combined force. In fact, it would be beneficial to corral them all together so you can win and be done with it. And no, this idea does not fix the plot hole of the Reapers not immediately taking the Citadel because the Reapers always do the divide and conquer strategy except this time. Unless we have some reason to think the Prothean Cycle was the exception there.
This doesn't lead to the conclusion that Reapers are weak. If a cow thought that the organization of slaughterhouses for efficiency meant that humans are worried aboult losing a war with cattle, she'd be mistaken.
That's only because the galaxy did almost nothing in the two years that Shepard was gone and because the game never demonstrated the wide spread of the Thanix Cannon. While I always thought it was silly, the codex says that even Fighters have this thing now. While obviously it would have less effect than the one on the Normandy, that would change the balance of power considerably.
It did change the balance of power. If the balance was still where it was in ME1, the Citadel forces would have been able to offer no effective resistance.
2) Don't take control away from the protagonist. We need to win and not simplyhave the villain quit unless we convinced them to quit because of our awesome charisma, like Saren or President EDEN from Fallout 3, and then only if that charisma has been a thing throughout the story, as it was with Shepard.
Hmm... so the Babylon 5 approach wouldn't work?
Also, I take it that "win" means some kind of fist-pumping moment of triumph? It's not enough to merely save the galaxy, right? We ought to get an Ewok Dance Party or some such too?
Also, I take it that "win" means some kind of fist-pumping moment of triumph? It's not enough to merely save the galaxy, right? We ought to get an Ewok Dance Party or some such too?
I definitely wouldn't take it that far, but I know you yourself have mentioned that we're not meant to take the Catalyst seriously, that he's essentially a broken AI. That's my interpretation definitely. But in that context, being given a moral scenario which the player doesn't really buy into and having to make a pretty dramatic moral sacrifice for a broken AI who self admits his cycle can't work? The best description I can think of is that sound a balloon makes when it deflates.
Rewatching the Hannibal tv series at the moment. It's a bit like that moment in Season 3 where Hannibal just surrenders to the FBI. As a viewer, I thought it was very well done. But as the person trying to catch Hannibal, playing that game of cat and mouse, there is also that element of "he let me win".
Also, I take it that "win" means some kind of fist-pumping moment of triumph? It's not enough to merely save the galaxy, right? We ought to get an Ewok Dance Party or some such too?
If by "chilling implications" you mean "the implications for the galaxy to chill out together," then I'd broadly agree, but I still think there's opportunity for conflict.
It's not what he meant.
Look we all know that the intentions from the writers is that everything is wonderful and everyone is at peace in the Synthesis ending. If you take the Synthesis ending at face value, then that's what you'll get out of it. But a lot of people don't look at it at face value because they recognize that it's really bad writing. There are so many details that the writers overlooked, that makes Synthesis an incredibly stupid and horrifying outcome if the ending was written by anybody who had a realistic and sensible understanding of what such a thing would do, and what it implies.
Not to mention if you look at it from a purely scientific point of view, it is the total and absolute raping of the balance of nature. Because let's not forget that both plants and animals are effected by Synthesis. I cannot begin to conceive what kind of repercussions that would have on an ecosystem.
Also, I take it that "win" means some kind of fist-pumping moment of triumph? It's not enough to merely save the galaxy, right? We ought to get an Ewok Dance Party or some such too?
What is it with you and Ewoks?
Again, I point to MEHEM. No one is dancing. Or even smiling. Yet it's a popular mod because it feels much more like a victory.
If by "chilling implications" you mean "the implications for the galaxy to chill out together," then I'd broadly agree, but I still think there's opportunity for conflict.
If Wreav is willing to abandon his war, there's something far more chilling than chillin' going on.
Edit not to mention the almost certain mass suicides that would almost certainly have taken place because, you know some people might object to being rewritten. Strenuously.
Unless of course something was preventing Wreav from acting out. Or making people be happy with these augments they never asked for. Unless green smilies were being painted on their souls...
I definitely wouldn't take it that far, but I know you yourself have mentioned that we're not meant to take the Catalyst seriously, that he's essentially a broken AI. That's my interpretation definitely. But in that context, being given a moral scenario which the player doesn't really buy into and having to make a pretty dramatic moral sacrifice for a broken AI who self admits his cycle can't work? The best description I can think of is that sound a balloon makes when it deflates.
Rewatching the Hannibal tv series at the moment. It's a bit like that moment in Season 3 where Hannibal just surrenders to the FBI. As a viewer, I thought it was very well done. But as the person trying to catch Hannibal, playing that game of cat and mouse, there is also that element of "he let me win".
Yeah, the Earth destroyer went down easier that the Rannoch Reaper. Mostly that's a problem with the Rannoch sequence. Boss fights usually make things worse.
That's the same problem every other space battle scene in the trilogy has. Making the scene look correct would have made it look less cool. To some extent this is a problem with the audience, and Bio's just going along with us.
This doesn't lead to the conclusion that Reapers are weak. If a cow thought that the organization of slaughterhouses for efficiency meant that humans are worried aboult losing a war with cattle, she'd be mistaken.
It did change the balance of power. If the balance was still where it was in ME1, the Citadel forces would have been able to offer no effective resistance.
The Earth Reaper bothers me more. Not only did they make up a new weapon but I still don't know what "give it everything you've got" was all about.
Yeah, it's definitely a "rule of cool" issue, but they could have worked around it by, for example, changing the attack angle so that Earth wasn't behind the Reapers. At least Rannoch had the excuse that they were using precise targeting.
You missed the point. Going system by system isn't nearly as efficient as corralling everyone into one place. To use your analogy, rather than use a slaughterhouse, the Reapers have the cows in a huge field and go to them one at a time with a knife.
The Refuse ending begs to differ. They didn't offer effective resistance. They killed a few Reapers but that had no effect on the outcome of a battle. It's over pretty quickly.
Hmm... so the Babylon 5 approach wouldn't work?
Also, I take it that "win" means some kind of fist-pumping moment of triumph? It's not enough to merely save the galaxy, right? We ought to get an Ewok Dance Party or some such too?
I did not watch Babylon 5 but I did look into the end a bit. The Babylon 5 approach could work because it's what I described above. In fact I've used a clip of Sheridan's speech in posts. Sheridan doesn't choose between the Vorlons and Shadows or some halfway option. He tells them to F-Off. If you want to relate it to Mass Effect, he took Refuse, but won. As far as the Ewok dance party, that's an epilogue and that's a different animal.
If Wreav is willing to abandon his war, there's something far more chilling than chillin' going on.
Edit not to mention the almost certain mass suicides that would almost certainly have taken place because, you know some people might object to being rewritten. Strenuously.
Unless of course something was preventing Wreav from acting out. Or making people be happy with these augments they never asked for. Unless green smilies were being painted on their souls...
... although I'm very much divided on whether I should put a "like" on any post where someone killed Wrex ... you fiend!
I did not watch Babylon 5 but I did look into the end a bit. The Babylon 5 approach could work because it's what I described above. In fact I've used a clip of Sheridan's speech in posts. Sheridan doesn't choose between the Vorlons and Shadows or some halfway option. He tells them to F-Off. If you want to relate it to Mass Effect, he took Refuse, but won. As far as the Ewok dance party, that's an epilogue and that's a different animal.
Interestingly, Sheridan "won" his "Get the hell out of our galaxy" speech because he did things Shepard never got to:
He actually managed to build up a coalition before the Shadows attacked.
He had the galaxy scoured looking for allies and relics to face the Shadows. Including several "Leviathan"-like races
He actually fought unconventionally. Using nukes, laying traps, and such. He didn't fight them head-on.
The White Star fleet was composed of combined Minbari and Vorlon technology.
The Shadows had an exploitable weakness, one that wasn't patched out by the writers: telepathic attacks.
In other words, SHeridan got to actually research his enemies, learn their strengths and weakneses, and plan accordingly.
Retour en haut
You can post than the link here. 
