1106 réponses à ce sujet

[BabyPuncher]

In other words, SHeridan got to actually research his enemies, learn their strengths and weakneses, and plan accordingly.

 

This is at best a clumsy analysis. 

 

First of all, you're going to have a very difficult time coming up with a physical weakness for the Reapers that doesn't look obscenely stupid and pointless for a super-advanced race that has done this millions of times.

 

Secondly, fighting 'unconventionally' is hardly some magic wand. And even if it was, the galactic forces don't have a choice. The fighting takes place where it takes place because that's where the Reapers attacked. You can't pack and move your infrastructure. Hence, as the codex says, the attacker always has the advantage in modern warfare.

 

Thirdly, even if the first two games involved 'building up a fleet' or something of the sort, it would not make any difference at all. The Reapers are going to crush the galaxy when the invade because that's the kind of villains they are. It makes no difference how strong the galaxy is. The Reapers bulldoze everything, because that is what they are and that is what they do.

[Arcian]

Thirdly, even if the first two games involved 'building up a fleet' or something of the sort, it would not make any difference at all. The Reapers are going to crush the galaxy when the invade because that's the kind of villains they are. It makes no difference how strong the galaxy is. The Reapers bulldoze everything, because that is what they are and that is what they do.

This mindset is reaching kindergarten "I'm bulletproof and you can't hurt me"-levels.

 

I agree with the general sentiment, Reapers aren't pushovers and conventional warfare isn't going to faze them in the slightest. If it were possible to defeat them conventionally, someone would have done so in the last billion years. However, you can't just say "They're unbeatable" and refer to their role in the story as the basis for that claim. You have to show it in the game. Otherwise it's just arbitrary.

[BabyPuncher]

This mindset is reaching kindergarten "I'm bulletproof and you can't hurt me"-levels.

 

I agree with the general sentiment, Reapers aren't pushovers and conventional warfare isn't going to faze them in the slightest. If it were possible to defeat them conventionally, someone would have done so in the last billion years. However, you can't just say "They're unbeatable" and refer to their role in the story as the basis for that claim. You have to show it in the game. Otherwise it's just arbitrary.

 

It's been foreshadowed in ME 1 and ME 2 to hell and back. Over and over again. The Reapers are extremely powerful. They're going to bulldoze the galaxy. It will take a miracle to defeat them. Over and over. Having them arrive as anything less is a cop-out and terrible writing.
 

[9TailsFox]

This is at best a clumsy analysis. 

 

First of all, you're going to have a very difficult time coming up with a physical weakness for the Reapers that doesn't look obscenely stupid and pointless for a super-advanced race that has done this millions of times.

 

Secondly, fighting 'unconventionally' is hardly some magic wand. And even if it was, the galactic forces don't have a choice. The fighting takes place where it takes place because that's where the Reapers attacked. You can't pack and move your infrastructure. Hence, as the codex says, the attacker always has the advantage in modern warfare.

 

Thirdly, even if the first two games involved 'building up a fleet' or something of the sort, it would not make any difference at all. The Reapers are going to crush the galaxy when the invade because that's the kind of villains they are. It makes no difference how strong the galaxy is. The Reapers bulldoze everything, because that is what they are and that is what they do.

Physical weakness is nothing you can destroy reaper so easy like any other ship reapers are made same stuff as all other ships. Problem is shield if you watch ME1 Sovereign was just one shot by Normandy. Seriously reapers invincible one freaking shot and not even thanix cannon simple weapon of ship. This nonsense is ridicules how to destroy reapers how about we ask the guys who created reapers to tell us shields specification. or instead finding deus ex machina find weapons capable of bypassing shields or destroying them. Yes writers decided reapers "invincible" galaxy government is incompetent and stupid ok this sounds realistic, I just saying this is stupid writing. It's a ship not space god, everything can be broken, and reapers not so advanced beyond our comprehension they are stupid AI with logic flaw.

[9TailsFox]

It's been foreshadowed in ME 1 and ME 2 to hell and back. Over and over again. The Reapers are extremely powerful. They're going to bulldoze the galaxy. It will take a miracle to defeat them. Over and over. Having them arrive as anything less is a cop-out and terrible writing.
 

it's been foreshadowed in ME1 and me2 to hell and back literary Shepard is space Jesus and can win impossible odds. And unity true diversity win.

[Iakus]

This is at best a clumsy analysis. 

 

First of all, you're going to have a very difficult time coming up with a physical weakness for the Reapers that doesn't look obscenely stupid and pointless for a super-advanced race that has done this millions of times.

 

Secondly, fighting 'unconventionally' is hardly some magic wand. And even if it was, the galactic forces don't have a choice. The fighting takes place where it takes place because that's where the Reapers attacked. You can't pack and move your infrastructure. Hence, as the codex says, the attacker always has the advantage in modern warfare.

 

Thirdly, even if the first two games involved 'building up a fleet' or something of the sort, it would not make any difference at all. The Reapers are going to crush the galaxy when the invade because that's the kind of villains they are. It makes no difference how strong the galaxy is. The Reapers bulldoze everything, because that is what they are and that is what they do.

1) A weakness does not have to be easy to exploit to still be a weakness

 

2) Which is why as I said, Sheridan fought unconventionally.  He lured the Shadows into traps.  Set mines.  Ambushes.  Lured them into the gravity wells of jovian planets, Dragged Vorlons into the fight.  Once he blew up a jump gate a Shadow vessel was transiting.

 

Then he went and nuked their homeworld...

 

3) That's writers' fiat.  The Reapers are as strong as the writers say they are.  And the Bioware writers decided that it didn't matter how much the galaxy built itself up or whether they fought conventionally or unconventionally.  It was the writers who said "You're gonna stop the Reapers the way we say you're gonna stop them.  Oh, but your choices are still important to us"  

[Iakus]

it's been foreshadowed in ME1 and me2 to hell and back literary Shepard is space Jesus and can win impossible odds. And unity true diversity win.

Actually ME1 seemed to have two paths:  strength through unity (Paragon) or standing strong and independent without relying on anyone else (renegade)

 

Good luck getting a good ending following the latter in ME3 

[Natureguy85]

 

First of all, you're going to have a very difficult time coming up with a physical weakness for the Reapers that doesn't look obscenely stupid and pointless for a super-advanced race that has done this millions of times.

 

 

But has anyone reverse engineered their tech and used it against them before? We also know that the Reapers divide and conquer so they haven't had to face a united galaxy ever.

[dreamgazer]

it's been foreshadowed in ME1 and me2 to hell and back literary Shepard is space Jesus

Shepard being Space Jesus doesn't make the Reapers any less powerful.
 

and can win impossible odds.

The Crucible achieved this. There also isn't an ending in Mass Effect where Shepard didn't "win impossible odds" without making huge concessions.

So, what, Shepard should be able to whip out a massive omni-blade and chop each and every one down? Your logic suggests that's totally acceptable.
 

And unity true diversity win.

How's that? Shepard can defeat Sovereign and The Collectors both by shirking unity and true diversity.

[dreamgazer]

But has anyone reverse engineered their tech and used it against them before?

The Protheans reverse-engineered their technology. The Protheans were also more advanced than this cycle. Stands to reason that similar has likely happened in the past. Also, if we can reverse-engineer their technology, why can't they simply respond to their own reverse-engineered tech?
 

We also know that the Reapers divide and conquer so they haven't had to face a united galaxy ever.

That's nothing but an assumption, actually. All we really know is that the Reapers have a billion years of success under their belts, that it took monumental conventional forces to take down a single Reaper, and that this cycle only had roughly three years (two of which were urinated away on the "Ah yes, Reapers" agenda) to prepare for forces way of their league.

[Swordfishtrombone]

I'd say that it's not hard to do an acceptable ending, just avoid these ME3 ending mistakes:

 

1. No Deus Ex Machina solution,

 

2. No new antagonist (or protagonist? Confused hybrid?) introduced in the last 10 minutes.

 

3. No violating the Science Fiction genre - everything that happens should have some connection to realism, or pseudo-realism, where it is consistent with how the Mass Effect universe has been known to work, with every new technology or phenomena being such that it can, at least in principle, be given a plausible mechanism by which it happens. 

 

4. An ending concept that does not involve giving a supposedly super-intelligent enemy a silly motivation. If they are super-intelligent, you damn well better make sure that their motivation can survive basic critical scrutiny, without contorted excuses and mental gymnastics. 

 

5. And most importantly: CHECK the ending with fresh eyes - and ROLE-PLAY IT!

Meaning go through the ending from the perspective of the protagonist who doesn't have a god's-eye view of the situation, who doesn't have certainty that he/she is going to win or survive, and who can evaluate the situation only in the light of his/her previous experiences.

 

A good example of where you clearly failed to do this is in ME3's ending, with the form chosen for the space boy - it's lifted straight out of Shepard's head. If you role-play a Shepard in that situation, confronted with a vision taken from his own memories, what is the obvious conclusion? Given all of Shepard's previous experiences of what happens when you interact with the Reapers for an extended time? INDOCTRINATION. That's what. And the vision taken from Shepard's head proves that the Reapers are in Shepard's head.

 

Given this situation, you CANNOT expect the player to believe anything but that they are being misled, indoctrinated. Then you fail to give Shepard dialogue options to express this obvious conclusion - probably because you completely missed this conclusion, otherwise you would not have given the space boy the shape you did - and force him to play along. And then inexplicably, for the first time in the Series, the Reapers play it completely straight, and it wasn't indoctrination after all, and you win? 

 

THAT is ultimately what was the worst thing about ME3's ending, that made it inexcusably bad, and a failure of concept and writing. 

 

So avoid these pitfalls, remember basic good story telling, and you'll do fine. I'd settle for fine.

[Natureguy85]

The Protheans reverse-engineered their technology. The Protheans were also more advanced than this cycle. Stands to reason that similar has likely happened in the past. Also, if we can reverse-engineer their technology, why can't they simply respond to their own reverse-engineered tech?
 

That's nothing but an assumption, actually. All we really know is that the Reapers have a billion years of success under their belts, that it took monumental conventional forces to take down a single Reaper, and that this cycle only had roughly three years (two of which were urinated away on the "Ah yes, Reapers" agenda) to prepare for forces way of their league.

 

What tech did the Protheans reverse engineer? I don't remember. While you're right that they were more advanced in most ways, did they have something on the level of the Thanix cannon? We know that they didn't get the chance to put their whole military might against the Reapers because the Reapers shut down the relays.

 

The assumption is that they did in every other cycle what they did to the Protheans. Vigil describes the divide and conquer tactic the Reapers used against them. While we aren't positive, it also looks like a single, large Mass Accelerator killed a Reaper. Why that was never used for more than a silly mission set up in ME2, I'm not sure.

[themikefest]

First of all, you're going to have a very difficult time coming up with a physical weakness for the Reapers that doesn't look obscenely stupid and pointless for a super-advanced race that has done this millions of times.

Why? The trilogy already showed they have a weakness. Its the backside. Why weren't there any scenes showing someone attacking a reaper from behind? The only one who did fire from behind were the Turians during the Battle of Palaven. They were able to destroy several capital ships
 

Secondly, fighting 'unconventionally' is hardly some magic wand. And even if it was, the galactic forces don't have a choice. The fighting takes place where it takes place because that's where the Reapers attacked. You can't pack and move your infrastructure. Hence, as the codex says, the attacker always has the advantage in modern warfare.

Ever heard of mobile units?
 

Thirdly, even if the first two games involved 'building up a fleet' or something of the sort, it would not make any difference at all. The Reapers are going to crush the galaxy when the invade because that's the kind of villains they are. It makes no difference how strong the galaxy is. The Reapers bulldoze everything, because that is what they are and that is what they do.

The reapers will always win just by numbers alone. This cycle should've been harvested even with the plans to build the crucible. All the reapers had to do was shutoff the relays when entering a system. That didn't happen in this cycle.

The only way to defeat the reapers is to find the plans to the device, build it and then use it before the reapers enter the galaxy

[9TailsFox]

Why? The trilogy already showed they have a weakness. Its the backside. Why weren't there any scenes showing someone attacking a reaper from behind? The only one who did fire from behind were the Turians during the Battle of Palaven. They were able to destroy several capital ships
 

Ever heard of mobile units?
 

The reapers will always win just by numbers alone. This cycle should've been harvested even with the plans to build the crucible. All the reapers had to do was shutoff the relays when entering a system. That didn't happen in this cycle.

The only way to defeat the reapers is to find the plans to the device, build it and then use it before the reapers enter the galaxy

Geth. No sleep no eat. The only way to defeat reapers build more geth. Protheans organics survived for 100 years how long unbeatable force survive against unbeatable force. Building magical microphone just activate reapers we surrender for no reason protocol but you still lost we surrender on our terms not your's.

[Chealec]

Why? The trilogy already showed they have a weakness. Its the backside. Why weren't there any scenes showing someone attacking a reaper from behind? The only one who did fire from behind were the Turians during the Battle of Palaven. They were able to destroy several capital ship.

 

I thought the backside was super-armoured, it's the giant frikken lazor you've gotta aim for isn't it?

[dreamgazer]

What tech did the Protheans reverse engineer? I don't remember.

They reverse-engineered the relays themselves, remember?

While you're right that they were more advanced in most ways, did they have something on the level of the Thanix cannon?

What's the fascination with the Thanix cannon being some kind of ace in the hole against the billion-year-old mecha-Cthulhu who developed it?

We know that they didn't get the chance to put their whole military might against the Reapers because the Reapers shut down the relays.

This is, of course, true.
 

The assumption is that they did in every other cycle what they did to the Protheans.

The assumption is also that the Reapers have never had to do otherwise, and that they're somehow SOL if Plan A falls through.
 

While we aren't positive, it also looks like a single, large Mass Accelerator killed a Reaper. Why that was never used for more than a silly mission set up in ME2, I'm not sure.

Because that cannon is described as being the civilization's final defiant act with the knowledge that they would be exterminated, and it still didn't completely disable one Reaper.

[dreamgazer]

I'd say that it's not hard to do an acceptable ending, just avoid these ME3 ending mistakes:
 
1. No Deus Ex Machina solution

That isn't just an ME3 "ending mistake". ME1 contains the most literal example of a DEM solution from the entire trilogy: Vigil's Citadel-controlling datafile.

[themikefest]

I thought the backside was super-armoured, it's the giant frikken lazor you've gotta aim for isn't it?

Are you referring to the Rannoch reaper scene?

[Chealec]

Are you referring to the Rannoch reaper scene?

 

If that's that tedious-arsed dodge the lazor to get the tracking in mini-game ... then, yes.

[Arcian]

It's been foreshadowed in ME 1 and ME 2 to hell and back. Over and over again. The Reapers are extremely powerful. They're going to bulldoze the galaxy. It will take a miracle to defeat them. Over and over. Having them arrive as anything less is a cop-out and terrible writing.
 

I was specifically talking about your description, not their portrayal in the games.

 

Your description: "The Reapers bulldoze the galaxy because that's what they do."

The games description: "The Reapers effortlessly harvest the galaxy's civilizations through the use of advanced technology, superior firepower and overwhelming numbers."

 

The games give a proper explanation to their power. You explain it with a recursive logic fallacy, "They do X because they do X."

[themikefest]

If that's that tedious-arsed dodge the lazor to get the tracking in mini-game ... then, yes.

That whole thing was a joke

 

Gerrell will say what did we hit. Shepard says hit the firing chamber while its priming. The problem with that is the reaper was hit before  the doors to the chamber were opened. So what Shepard said is incorrect. At that point the reaper is destroyed or at least should be. The reaper gets up, after being on its side for about 20 seconds. Shepard paints the target. The firing chamber is hit. Nothing. The reaper never fell over on its side like it did the first time. Why? If the fire chamber is its weak spot why wasn't it destroyed at that moment. This happens again couple more times. Its only when the reaper is close enough to give Shepard a kiss that its destroyed. Then the conversation with the thing happens.

[RoboticWater]

That isn't just an ME3 "ending mistake". ME1 contains the most literal example of a DEM solution from the entire trilogy: Vigil's Citadel-controlling datafile.

The difference here is presentation. In ME1 you're given the solution from a VI with limited knowledge. It also helps that the ultimate goal isn't to control the Citadel, it's to defeat Saren/Sovereign. Your victory against the antagonist isn't directly dependent on that DEM. ME1 could just as easily have had you "hack the mainframe," and no one would really care because that doesn't change how your confrontation with Saren goes down. ME1 doesn't even make a big deal out of this code either.

 

ME3's DEM is the centerpiece of the whole game that you find conveniently at the beginning of the game, it's the only method of defeating the main antagonist, and it's presented by some apparently all-knowing being. I don't care what something is or isn't, I care about what it looks like. Both games might have DEMs but ME3 does its best to slap you across the face with it. 

[AlanC9]

Physical weakness is nothing you can destroy reaper so easy like any other ship reapers are made same stuff as all other ships. Problem is shield if you watch ME1 Sovereign was just one shot by Normandy. Seriously reapers invincible one freaking shot and not even thanix cannon simple weapon of ship. This nonsense is ridicules how to destroy reapers how about we ask the guys who created reapers to tell us shields specification. or instead finding deus ex machina find weapons capable of bypassing shields or destroying them. Yes writers decided reapers "invincible" galaxy government is incompetent and stupid ok this sounds realistic, I just saying this is stupid writing. It's a ship not space god, everything can be broken, and reapers not so advanced beyond our comprehension they are stupid AI with logic flaw.

This is basically a request for weaker space magic --- space magic that makes the Reapers just weak enough so conventional weapons can destroy them.

How do you get the Reapers to stick around when their shields are off? This was the problem with Independence Day -- though demanding sense from that film is an obvious mistake.

And again, the ability to blow up an individual Reaper is not the same thing as being able to win the war. The Japanese retained the ability to sink US warships until the very end, but this didn't give them a chance.

[AlanC9]

It also helps that the ultimate goal isn't to control the Citadel, it's to defeat Saren/Sovereign. Your victory against the antagonist isn't directly dependent on that DEM. ME1 could just as easily have had you "hack the mainframe," and no one would really care because that doesn't change how your confrontation with Saren goes down. ME1 doesn't even make a big deal out of this code either.

Meaning that since the specifics of the DEM don't matter -- it's an arbitrary solution and any solution will do -- there's no real issue with it being a DEM. DEM's are only a problem when we have to think about them. Hmm. I suppose with my current sig I'm going to have to approve of this.

ME3's DEM is the centerpiece of the whole game that you find conveniently at the beginning of the game, it's the only method of defeating the main antagonist, and it's presented by some apparently all-knowing being. I don't care what something is or isn't, I care about what it looks like. Both games might have DEMs but ME3 does its best to slap you across the face with it.

Note that the centerpiece of the whole game can't be a DEM in the traditional sense. But in the absence of an alternative I suppose we'll have to use this one.

I suppose this means that a DEM is good when it's a MacGuffin?

[Natureguy85]

They reverse-engineered the relays themselves, remember?


What's the fascination with the Thanix cannon being some kind of ace in the hole against the billion-year-old mecha-Cthulhu who developed it?


This is, of course, true.
 

The assumption is also that the Reapers have never had to do otherwise, and that they're somehow SOL if Plan A falls through.
 

Because that cannon is described as being the civilization's final defiant act with the knowledge that they would be exterminated, and it still didn't completely disable one Reaper.

 

True, I wasn't thinking about the Conduit. They were indeed able to replicate it on a small level. That didn't help them fight the Reapers though. I was also talking about technology from an actual Reaper, not stuff the Reapers left on purpose for them to find.

 

It's because the Thanix cannon is our one example of using the Reapers' technology against them. I don't know why you assume that the Reapers are "billion-year-old mecha-Cthulhu" means they are invincible against everything, including their own weapons. The arrogance of the opposition is a common weakness. They've never had to fight a real war. They've probably never had any of their tech taken like that. There is zero reason the Thanix cannon can't beat Reaper shields, and the game tells us that it's in such widespread use as to be put onto fighters.

 

You're right that it's an assumption that the Reapers have never had to do otherwise, but it's a sensible one. The Reapers have a cycle, which implies the same thing every time. They leave their technology so the galaxy develops predictably. They show up, they take the Citadel, they shut down the relays, they wipe out the star-faring species bit by bit. They aren't SOL if plan A falls through, but they operate on prediction and things are now occurring differently than they had anticipated. Particularly for AIs, it's common for something like the Reapers to not know how to deal with something that's different.

 

Right but TIM found the cannon early enough to do something with it and make it a thing for the future. It did disable the Reaper. It didn't utterly destroy it, but the Reaper is just floating there in space.