2. It is mentioned very often that the keepers keep the Citadel pristine. Why didn't they remove the conduit?
Maybe it was too similar to actual reaper tech, and the keepers just went with it -assuming it was actual reaper tech.
If one can live with that stretch, it is not that far off to assume that the keepers removed any non-reapertech looking VI gimmicks from the conduit, giving a possible answer to your point 3.
I suspect the Keepers aren't supposed to get rid of statues. Sure, they're there to maintain the Citadel and keep things tidy, but they're not going after things put in by the residents. After all, we don't see the Keepers trying to pull down the Krogan monument.
As for why whatever clean up crew the Reapers used(since they clearly had some everywhere else in the galaxy), why would they bother getting rid of it? The Reapers never found Ilos, so to them it was nothing more than an incomplete half of a paired relay, and served no purpose. And since it wasn't something unique to the species that built it, it wouldn't point to an older, unknown race further down the line. There's no reason to suspect it's builders weren't the creators of the Citadel, and if anything it enhances the trap by placing additional emphasis on the importance of the Relays.
Vigil says: "The Conduit is the key. Before the Reapers attacked, we Protheans were on the cusp of unlocking the mysteries behind mass relay technology. Ilos was a top secret facility. Here, researchers worked to create a small-scale version of a mass relay. One that linked directly to the Citadel: the hub of the relay network."
Vigil also also stated earlier that the Protheans didn't know the Citadel was a mass relay. Which begs the question, how could they have built a relay before the war if they didn't fully understand mass relay technology, and how could they have linked it to the Citadel if they didn't know the Citadel was a mass relay?
And unrelated to this, but earlier in the conversation with Vigil he says that the Reapers are vulnerable in dark space, between cycles. Which makes me wonder if there wasn't some early plan to get to the Reapers in dark space.
Actually, you're off on this one. The Conduit, at least its receiver on the Citadel, had to be done before. The Citadel Relay wasn't the exit point of the Conduit; the Relay Monument was, so they wouldn't need to know the Citadel was a Relay. They build their own exit.
I thought the series would have us exploring the Citadel more, uncovering the Relay function, and attacking the Reapers in Dark Space somehow.
Now to the questions:
1. Why didn't the reapers detect the conduit and trace it? Ok, maybe they couldn't trace it but they should have noticed the little unfamiliar relay right in front of the Citadel tower. Why didn't they remove it?
2. It is mentioned very often that the keepers keep the Citadel pristine. Why didn't they remove the conduit?
3. If no one removed the conduit, why didn't the prothean scientists from Illos leave a message (similar to Liara's time capsules) on the Citadel (maybe put it on the conduit relay since the keepers leave it alone? That way, the first boarding party that enters the Citadel in the next cycle would be sure to immediately learn of the reapers, which would have definitely helped. With all their efforts focused on how the next cycle might be able to defeat the reapers, how couldn't they think of that?
So yea, ME1 is by no means perfect in how the plot is spun. It's still leaps and bounds above what comes after but it does have its own shaky plot points for sure.
1) Only the Receiver is on the Citadel. It appears to be just a statue. Even if they could still detect that something was up with it, The Reapers are giant space ships and can't get on the Citadel. Only their Indoctrnated servants of limited capacity can. They didn't find it because they weren't looking for it. Anyone not involved with the project wouldn't know it wasn't just a statue.
2) Why would they move it? It's not in their way. In fact, if they think it's just a statue, the Reapers have a reason to leave it there as it links the Citadel with the Relays in the minds of any inhabitants, making the Citadel seem familiar and safe.
3) This ones harder but maybe they didn't have what they would need to do so.
Actually, you're off on this one. The Conduit, at least its receiver on the Citadel, had to be done before. The Citadel Relay wasn't the exit point of the Conduit; the Relay Monument was, so they wouldn't need to know the Citadel was a Relay. They build their own exit.
I'll certainly grant this, but I'm still curious why Vigil would say that the Protheans were on the cusp of understanding relay technology if they had already built a relay. Surely that means that they did understand relay technology.
I'll certainly grant this, but I'm still curious why Vigil would say that the Protheans were on the cusp of understanding relay technology if they had already built a relay. Surely that means that they did understand relay technology.
I just took it as they understood it in part. They had a working, small scale, one way prototype. The scientists going after the invasion may have been its first use.
Some more speczlation:
Probably was overlooked by the cleaning crew in some lab. After the protheans used it, they put it on the Presidium, The Keepers switched to maintenance mode and took it as some kind of decoration which they incorporated in the landscape.
The protheans left a message but the Keepers filed it under vandalism/grafitti and removed it.
I'm just picturing keepers with soapy water and scrub brushes washing a wall clean of spray paint that says "its a trap!" painted on the side of the monument.
Endings were bad, extended cut just helped for a better understanding of them.. I chose Destroy because it's the right one in MY opinion and the only which does actualy make sense.
Having finally completed the trilogy for a second time, with all the DLC this time, I can safely say I'm no happier now than I was before. I just...can't see how anyone can be happy with the resolution to this. I may be hijacking this thread slightly, so apologies, but need to vent (as I never bothered when ME3 came out). After a month's solid playing, I feel kinda empty, which is really irritating.
Before I get to why the endings, I did just want to vent on two things, which for me sum up the endings as well:
Spawning - half the maps just seemed designed for MP. I bumped into spawn points a few times, which just smacked of laziness.
Kai Leng - who was he? Why was he there? Did I miss any explanation? BioWare is excellent at character building, so this made even less sense. It felt like some kid had won a competition to add in a new character, and he said "some ninja dude! That would be awesome!" And there he was. A pantomime villain, complete with "he's behind you!" moment when he was still alive and making enough noise to wake the dead, and yet no one noticed him until the last second. Did we forget ME1 when Shep told his teammate to "make sure" with Saren?
You might wonder why these points are here, but to me it adds to the discussion of why the endings were so bad. It was all so rushed. I know BioWare have always said that they wanted to tell a story, and that's fine, but why create a main character who can take on anyone, only to have them constantly beaten in cut-scenes? Thessia was the perfect example. It was such a cheap way to create anger and yet another pointless setback when there was no need for them. Kai Leng is The Man Who Cannot Be Killed...until the game is ready.
But anyway, on to the endings.
There are simple problems with each choice (I'm going to ignore the utter stupidity of the fact that there are silly binary choices in the first place, otherwise I'll be writing forever).
1. Control - we know throughout the entire trilogy that control is wrong. That was the entire point of the trilogy, the whole point of the game. It's interesting to have it as an option, but the fact that it actually works (at least, to some extent), turns Shep into some kind of God, and the Reapers into tools. I know this has been stated dozens of times already, but making the Reapers simple tools makes no sense at all to everything we've already been told.
2. Synthesis - not sure if this has been mentioned, but there's a fundamental problem here I don't understand. Synthesis is not perfection. It is not evolution. By definition, evolution is a natural process. Synthetic life is by same principles, unnatural. There is nothing "evolved" about simply merging organic life with synthetic life. Conflict does not simply disappear with the merging of chaos and order, it's ridiculous.
3. Destroy - this is the one that makes the least sense (ironic, seeing as how it's the thing you've been building up to for the entire trilogy), and I've not seen any other comments on this point, but maybe I've missed them (which is entirely possible, given the god-knows-how-many posts there must be on this).
Why does Shep have to shoot the power conduit? Why does the most advanced piece of machinery in the entire history of life in the galaxy have this terrible flaw And why does shooting something create a "destroy" pulse? It makes absolutely no sense whatever. There is no logical reason why Shep has to die from this action, and that is the worst possible thing about it - nothing else blows up apart from the citadel and the Mass Relays, hmm how convenient. Even if you do argue that shooting a pipe in this incredibly advanced super weapon would somehow do everything it does, why does it target everything? The Reapers appear to be vastly different from all other synthetic life, and yet there's no way to differentiate? It makes no sense. It's such a cheap shot (pun intended) to force you to kill all synthetic life, particularly when you know that it's all going to start again shortly. If the geth/EDI were still around, it would not. This actually makes Destroy the worst ending, as presumably the cycle hasn't been broken at all. The Reapers are gone, but presumably not the Intelligence (or Leviathan, which was the whole problem in the first place).
And if the Mass Relays are all destroyed, how does anyone get home? Lucky the Normandy crewed ended up on a nice, habitable world. Phew, eh?!
Lazy, rushed, pointless. Thanks.
Arfpint.
Feel better?
Heh, maybe a little...
Endings were bad, extended cut just helped for a better understanding of them.. I chose Destroy because it's the right one in MY opinion and the only which does actualy make sense.
the best thing the extended cut did was fix the flashbacks as Shepard chooses whatever ending
Heh, maybe a little...
Try to combine all the data into some own theory, explaining everything. It will not make the ending of the game correct, but with depression will help.
Mine is that the writers did a very poor job.
I don't think so. The game was released four years ago, but we are still discussing it.Mine is that the writers did a very poor job.
I don't think so. The game was released four years ago, but we are still discussing it.
it was a joke ©
We're discussing it because the story was terrible and didn't have to be. There was a lot of good there that went to waste.
Shepard's face when EDI does that line is great.
We're discussing it because the story was terrible and didn't have to be. There was a lot of good there that went to waste.
Shepard's face when EDI does that line is great.
None of EDI's other jokes can beat her first one to Joker when the Collectors board the Normandy. Heh, I remember the first time I played ME2 and how tense I felt during that part- that joke had perfect timing.
None of EDI's other jokes can beat her first one to Joker when the Collectors board the Normandy. Heh, I remember the first time I played ME2 and how tense I felt during that part- that joke had perfect timing.
Paradoxically, that perfect timing is actually how poorly timed it was. Though my favorite part is Joker's line right before that.
Mine is that the writers did a very poor job.
This is one of the reasons they didn't listen to people here on the BSN. Not a lot of constructive feedback to be found.
This is one of the reasons they didn't listen to people here on the BSN. Not a lot of constructive feedback to be found.
Derp. There was plenty and I've posted plenty. That's a lazy excuse. Like I said, that was a summary. No, they either really did think what they put out was brilliant or they had to just repeat the company line. They listened to some extent because they made the EC.
Yet Bioware fled to Reddit, Twitter, and Facebook, three sites we all know are bastions of well thought out and constructive criticism.
I just don't buy that the 'toxic' community here is why Bioware staff now ignore it. How can they possibly have better controls over the bad elements of their community on third party sites? It's not as if the people who did troll them don't know about their existence.
Personally I'm of the opinion that it is because of possible bad PR. Far easier to write off a staff members post on a third party site as their personal opinion or a 'hack' (I seem to remember that being the excuse about an infamous post on the Penny Arcade forum), than it is on the company's official site.
Thessia was the perfect example. It was such a cheap way to create anger and yet another pointless setback when there was no need for them. Kai Leng is The Man Who Cannot Be Killed...until the game is ready.
The best thing about Thessia is bringing Javik on the mission for his dialogue otherwise the whole mission was bad
Why does Shep have to shoot the power conduit?
Same reason why Shepard couldn't shoot the thing from a distance instead of getting up close and personal with it. I would like for BioWare to answer that question.
And if the Mass Relays are all destroyed, how does anyone get home?
The relays only explode if ems is below 2600. Above 2600, only the rings are damaged even though it shows otherwise with that relay as the ships fly by
Lucky the Normandy crewed ended up on a nice, habitable world. Phew, eh?!
If ems is above 2600, the Normandy is seen flying off the unknown planet. Below 2600, its stuck on the unknown planet for however long. The problem I have is that with ems being below 2600, it shows the thrusters been torn from the fuselage. The ship ends up on the planet in one piece. How is that possible? The ship should be in pieces with everyone onboard dead.
Derp. There was plenty and I've posted plenty. That's a lazy excuse. Like I said, that was a summary. No, they either really did think what they put out was brilliant or they had to just repeat the company line. They listened to some extent because they made the EC.
There is some, but not a lot. See, most people on BSN want Bioware to fix or rewrite the ending, according to what they see wrong with it.
Oh, and words like lazy, or bad writing, etc, aren't constructive. Try using more positive words. That's how you get people to listen to you.
The Extended Cut did provide closure, and a little more personalization regards to your choices, which is what people asked for. However, those who wanted a new ending weren't going to get one. You know, what you do for one, you have to do for everyone. There wasn't going to be one version of the ending to address the most vocal fans, and another to address everyone else's. Since they had a wide variety of feedback on the ending, and it wasn't all negative, they decided to extend and expand on things, rather than rewrite it.
There was also the thing I talked about reproducing the problem, before they actually do anything. So if people were saying there was a problem with the ending, but the team couldn't reproduce the problem, it wasn't going to be fixed.
Considering the contents of Natureguy85's sig, you really should have found someone better to try that on.
It's been years, everything that can be said has been said, and now calling the writing lazy or bad is just shorthand for the overly long lists of problems, with just about every aspect of the endings.
I have signatures disabled.
Retour en haut