3598 réponses à ce sujet

[gothpunkboy89]

The fact that I need to assume anything to make sense of it is bad enough.

 

Why? You make plenty of assumptions on your own anyways.

[gothpunkboy89]

Yeah, Gaider's problem isn't the posters. It's about what a ****** job his company does at moderating the forums. People are toxic because they can be. Moderators throw out warning points that have no effect on behavior, because there are no repercussions for having warning points. Moderators are unclear on rules for their own forums. If Gaider wants to blame someone for toxicity around here, he needs to talk to Conal Pierse, whose job it is to police the moderators.

 

No it is the players. This is seen over and over again. You don't need to out right insult someone to be toxic and rude. The near constant abuse players aim towards any and all things BioWare had done for this game/trilogy is more then enough proof of this.  Particularly when it gets to the point many players like even yourself will argue for no reason other then to make BioWare look stupid even if the point being made is considered valid by other players who you would usually agree with.

 

Lost track of the number of time I've been called a BioWare boot licker or some variation of that by players on forums because holy cow I might not think the game was as bad as other people.  I think the old saying can't see the forest thru the trees applies here.

[kal_reegar]

The fact that I need to assume anything to make sense of it is bad enough.

 

why?

the catalyst doesn't specify if he is able or not to control the citadel from a mechanical point of view. He tell us nothing about it (on the contrary, it's implied that he's uncapable of material action, when he said that he cannot make the crucible work, and shepard is need to do that")

you also from ME1 that the keepers control the citadel from a mechanical point of view.

 

so this assumption is logical... 1+1 = 2

 

The catalyst cannot control the Citadel. Or maybe he can, but with heavy limitations.

[BloodyMares]

Why? You make plenty of assumptions on your own anyways.

Is it an empty comment or you can actually back it up?

[gothpunkboy89]

Ha, the "give peace a chance" comment was mine, so if anyone missed the context it was you. I never said it would solve the problem. The point is that I'm not convinced there is a problem and even if there is, the current cycle deserves the chance to exist and not be wiped out. And even if it only delays the inevitable, that delay is worthwhile.

 

You have been watching far to many Disney movies and seem to have a very warped sense of reality. All that does will ensure you get to live and die of old age. Your children or grandchildren how ever will not. I think Narcissus from Greek Mythology just blushed in envy of loving yourself so much.  Why does this I can only call it a theme show up over and over again. Were people pick short term solutions that if they were in the universe would ensure they would be able to live a full life but would corn hole everyone that came after them.

 

That's exactly why the endings are problematic, particularly Synthesis. 

 

Not really. Because Synthesis and Control to same extent allows people to still chart their own courses without that fun side effect of mass murder and death in the future. Destroy is more a leap of faith. One that if you paid attention to the game you would realize might not be the best.

 

That's true. So what?

 

Kind of the point I'm trying to make about how much a rouge AI could corn hole organics.

 

AI's only have the abilities given to them in the setting. Whatever you think they should be able to do based on the real world, other works, or your own wild imaginings is irrelevant. EDI and other AIs are more advanced, but warships already have VI help for the things a person can't handle quickly enough.

 

And again every thing I stated is based on what WE can do right now without being computer programs. It is entirely possible for people to hack the Onstar Signal and remotely control your car by applying the breaks or cutting the engine.

 

http://www.cbsnews.c...-on-60-minutes/

 

If every system was physically and wirelessly isolated from each other it could reduce the impact an intruding AI could do to their systems. VI's are just advanced computers they can not think, reason or plan the way an AI could. If an AI went after a VI the AI would win the conflict every time. Realistically the Reapers should have been making the Fleets of the galaxy perform swan lake firing at each other at point blank range while they sat back and watched. Geth regardless of jammer or not once locked onto the Quarian systems particularly post Reaper take over should have been scrambling their ship's data like eggs.

[gothpunkboy89]

Is it an empty comment or you can actually back it up?

 

Is your post history not enough backing of things up?

[dorktainian]

No, it wasn't. It was a side story tied to the Reaper plot by a tiny, weak thread. We learned nothing of value about the Reapers or how to stop them. What we learned made them more horrific in a way, but they were already out to destroy us. Do we really care what they do with our corpses? The link to Reapers is just TIM saying he suspects they work for the Reapers. Then they have husks. Ok, so these are the new "geth" for this game. What exactly is their goal? They are kidnapping colonists. Well, they can't actually attack Earth as the squad supposes. What are they going to do with this new Reaper if they finish it? Why are they building it now? Oh, at the end we see Harbinger is a Reaper. Well Shepard didn't see that and doesn't really learn it until Arrival, if you do it.

 

And what is the benefit of that "education?" The ability to choose from the brand new antagonist's color options?

 

 

take a step away from ME3 a minute and look at the bigger picture.  What did ME2 show us?

 

 

The Protheans failed the Crucible - chose synthesis by the sounds of it - and were artificially enhanced - which over time led to their utter demise as a species and forced their servitude under Harbinger and the reapers.  It introduced the fact that Shepard was important to the reapers, and humanity was now 'the' target of them in order for them to complete the cycle.  It made us aware that progress towards the end of the cycle was a lot further on than thought, as the human reaper was almost complete. 

[gothpunkboy89]

take a step away from ME3 a minute and look at the bigger picture.  What did ME2 show us?

 

 

The Protheans failed the Crucible - chose synthesis by the sounds of it - and were artificially enhanced - which over time led to their utter demise as a species and forced their servitude under Harbinger and the reapers.  It introduced the fact that Shepard was important to the reapers, and humanity was now 'the' target of them in order for them to complete the cycle.  It made us aware that progress towards the end of the cycle was a lot further on than thought, as the human reaper was almost complete. 

 

That is an interesting Idea that I've seen pop up a few times. That the collectors are a failed attempt at synthesis by the Catalyst.

[BloodyMares]

Is your post history not enough backing of things up?

Not really. I don't remember assuming anything about the game. If I ever assume anything, I do it from Shepard's perspective and only in the context of making an important choice. If I look at the story as a whole, I shouldn't assume anything.

[gothpunkboy89]

Not really. I don't remember assuming anything about the game. If I ever assume anything, I do it from Shepard's perspective and only in the context of making an important choice. If I look at the story as a whole, I shouldn't assume anything.

And yet the many times we trade points on a topic is because of assumptions we both make.

[dorktainian]

That is an interesting Idea that I've seen pop up a few times. That the collectors are a failed attempt at synthesis by the Catalyst.

 

well he did say he'd tried before but failed because 'it cannot be forced'.  synthesis didn't work because eventually the synthetic parts of the equation totally subsumed the organic parts.  ergo synthetics win longer term.  Control?  'He could never control us because we already controlled him' ah yes slavery.

 

Unless all three answers are correct?  in a multiverse theory kind of way?

 

honestly tho I see shooting the tube as the only answer because I see it as a symbolic representation of the last hold the reapers have on shepard (again i'm going to harken back to ME2).  It's a direct analogy.  Shoot the tube and break the connection - but instead of the connection of the reapers to humanity, the breaking of the connection between the reapers and shepard.... hence the breath scene (which I know was a little easter egg, but its significance can not be understated).

[Monica21]

No it is the players. This is seen over and over again. You don't need to out right insult someone to be toxic and rude. The near constant abuse players aim towards any and all things BioWare had done for this game/trilogy is more then enough proof of this.  Particularly when it gets to the point many players like even yourself will argue for no reason other then to make BioWare look stupid even if the point being made is considered valid by other players who you would usually agree with.
 
Lost track of the number of time I've been called a BioWare boot licker or some variation of that by players on forums because holy cow I might not think the game was as bad as other people.  I think the old saying can't see the forest thru the trees applies here.

You don't have any idea how forum moderation works. If Bioware's own staff is running to places like Reddit because it's a better environment, all that means is that it's better moderated. And that's a lot of bull. They need to clean up their own house. There's nothing in the rules that says you can't dislike the product. There's nothing in the rules that state you can't voice your opinion about the product and why you dislike it. The rules state that people have to be respectful of each other, not whatever Bioware produces. You can't use profanity, but for the most part, that's filtered out. Except for the times it isn't, and then you get a warning point. Instead of, you know, someone taking care of that and filter the word. You can also get a warning point for self-censoring a word. Which is the dumbest thing I've ever heard of.

And you've been going around asking a lot of rhetorical questions lately. I consider that to be arguing for argument's sake. I don't care if you like ME3 or not or if you think the ending makes sense or not. What I do care about is whether you can make sense of why you like it if you're going to argue why it's good. You've had people telling you why your analogies don't work. You've had people tell you what happens in the game because your recollection is wrong. You've been moving the goalposts since you started arguing a point. You are unable to articulate your point of view. Again, I don't care if you like it. No one does. But if you're going to argue a position then you have to learn how to do it correctly, or you've failed even the attempt.

I love Bioware's product. I have nearly seven complete ME playthroughs. It's a hell of a fun game to play. I stopped my ME playthrough to start a DA2 run earlier this week. Might as well call me an ME fangirl. But the ME3 ending still doesn't make sense and if I want to come on this forum and say that the ending doesn't make sense and that Bioware should have done better, nothing in the rules prevents me from doing so.

[BloodyMares]

And yet the many times we trade points on a topic is because of assumptions we both make.

If by trading points you mean me making them and you not paying attention to them and instead stating either the obvious or completely irrelevant stuff. Yeah. Speaking of which, when are you going to answer to my previous post? Did you give up?

[gothpunkboy89]

You don't have any idea how forum moderation works. If Bioware's own staff is running to places like Reddit because it's a better environment, all that means is that it's better moderated. And that's a lot of bull. They need to clean up their own house. There's nothing in the rules that says you can't dislike the product. There's nothing in the rules that state you can't voice your opinion about the product and why you dislike it. The rules state that people have to be respectful of each other, not whatever Bioware produces. You can't use profanity, but for the most part, that's filtered out. Except for the times it isn't, and then you get a warning point. Instead of, you know, someone taking care of that and filter the word. You can also get a warning point for self-censoring a word. Which is the dumbest thing I've ever heard of.

And you've been going around asking a lot of rhetorical questions lately. I consider that to be arguing for argument's sake. I don't care if you like ME3 or not or if you think the ending makes sense or not. What I do care about is whether you can make sense of why you like it if you're going to argue why it's good. You've had people telling you why your analogies don't work. You've had people tell you what happens in the game because your recollection is wrong. You've been moving the goalposts since you started arguing a point. You are unable to articulate your point of view. Again, I don't care if you like it. No one does. But if you're going to argue a position then you have to learn how to do it correctly, or you've failed even the attempt.

I love Bioware's product. I have nearly seven complete ME playthroughs. It's a hell of a fun game to play. I stopped my ME playthrough to start a DA2 run earlier this week. Might as well call me an ME fangirl. But the ME3 ending still doesn't make sense and if I want to come on this forum and say that the ending doesn't make sense and that Bioware should have done better, nothing in the rules prevents me from doing so.

 

Toxicity exits in far more ways then simply "bad" words used against one another. Many a player I've yet to see anything even vaugly like a complement towards this game. Some use often odd or stretching logic to support their ideas. Like Mr Fob using as a reason that AI's are not a thread because if their blue box is destroyed they die. Which kind of reminds me of this line from Hotel Transylvania:

 

Jonathan: Huh. Wooden stake to the heart?

Dracula: Yeah, well, who wouldn't that kill?

 

My analogies work. Ever seem to notice the people that keep saying that my analogies don't work are also the same people that disagree with the point I'm trying to make? Seems rather suspect don't you think?

 

Oh they have corrected my recollection of the game and what corrections are we talking about here? Because so far they have only been small ones. 6 frigates instead of 3 sent against the Geth Flagship. That it was long range scanning software EDI downloaded instead of a new targeting system. WoW such massive things I have forgotten.

 

I move no goal post and I articulate my posts just fine. It is players like you that jump the gun and start trying to argue against what I post simply because I posted it. Seriously you jumped with both heel out down my throat so fast eve NatureGuy someone who I have been disagreeing with since I came to this forum had to step in and tell you to calm down. I don't need to articulate better you need to slow your roll a bit.

 

The toxicity is real on these forums with posts like:

 

(1) ...didn't have any interest in facilitating roleplaying, but only in what he wanted the player to do.

(2) ...used the games to dominate the player to favor presentation of his favorite characters and faction, and because he had no idea how to make them smarter, he made the player character more stupid.

(3) ...had no idea how to make characters talk competently about a topic. All he knows is drama and emotional appeal.

(4) ...used the games to present stupidity as profundity,

(5) ...replaced careful plot writing with sequences of short-term drama, shock effects and supposed coolness.

 

I could go on for quite a bit.

 

So in spite of some shining moments of videogame storytelling, usually in the side plots, large parts of ME2 and most of ME3 are a mess of disparate elements put together by an incompetent writer, and the ending is just the culmination of everything that went wrong before. As bad as ME1 was in gameplay and how ugly it looked at times, I wish the trilogy had continued in its spirit.

 

 

From Leldra who never seems to reply to anyone questioning these statements. I've asked her a few time how she came to a few of her conclusions with nothing. To players like QMR who posts a long post fan boying/girling for all they are worth about the Quarians. I counter that with every example I can in game showing how it is being stretched and suddenly I'm a Geth fanboy who doesn't know what they are talking about. Who doesn't actually respond to my post but claims they had a whole long post set up but it was deleted by accident. And a few people cheered for him on that.

 

Toxicity is real on these forums and it isn't the lack or odd set up of forum moderation. Because even if was strictly enforced the same toxicity would exist.

[BloodyMares]

take a step away from ME3 a minute and look at the bigger picture.  What did ME2 show us?

 

 

The Protheans failed the Crucible - chose synthesis by the sounds of it - and were artificially enhanced - which over time led to their utter demise as a species and forced their servitude under Harbinger and the reapers.  It introduced the fact that Shepard was important to the reapers, and humanity was now 'the' target of them in order for them to complete the cycle.  It made us aware that progress towards the end of the cycle was a lot further on than thought, as the human reaper was almost complete. 

ME2 didn't show that at all, it's your headcanon. ME3 states that nobody finished the Crucible in time and they didn't get to the choice room (Shepard is the first organic ever). Therefore Protheans didn't "choose" anything. Collectors are just Prothean husks (not as mindless perhaps).

[Monica21]

Toxicity is real on these forums and it isn't the lack or odd set up of forum moderation. Because even if was strictly enforced the same toxicity would exist.

You're confusing toxicity with criticism. And I just can't help you there. Nothing that Ieldra posted could be considered toxic. Unless your bar for toxicity is "people who disagree with me."

[AlanC9]

The sad thing is that it could be quite easy to fix.
1) Instead of making the Catalyst the collective intelligence of the Reapers just make it the first AI that created the Reapers to solve the supposed problem (that existed back there).
2) It wasn't helping the Reapers in previous games because it was dormant (didn't come up with the reason) until the Crucible just woke it up.
3) Ditch the Catalyst name. Catalyst is the Citadel while the AI is just a nameless deus ex machina.
There. at least this way it doesn't contradict its absence in ME1 THAT much. Note that my intention was just to fix the Catalyst itself, not rewrite the whole ending. I'm not getting paid to fix it.

What's wrong with the name?

Anyway, that's not bad, but I'd have gone with the prothean scientists sabotaging the relay controls and repair systems. This isn't conceptually very different from what they had to accomplish in order for ME1 to work, and it gets around the problem of the relays still working in the ME3 endgame.

[BloodyMares]

http://www.shamusyou...edtale/?p=32094 - finally a relevant read to this topic.

[Ieldra]

From Leldra who never seems to reply to anyone questioning these statements. I've asked her a few time how she came to a few of her conclusions with nothing.

I've been talking about this stuff for years, so forgive me for not repeating everything I've ever said for your benefit. I've linked to my more elaborate posts several times (for instance, this one.

 

Also, you call that toxic? That if I see something that looks like the work of an incompetent writer, I dare assume that writer is actually incompetent rather than make up excuses? I've written a few doubtful things over the years, but the post you quoted I will maintain as written. You'll find more detailed explanations of those points in this thread. I'll go further and claim that Bioware's more competent writers would agree with me if they could talk freely, because it's so glaringly obvious.

 

As for not answering, I've been here for several years, I don't look in here every day any more. As for you specifically, you have a habit of targeting side issues and avoiding the core of the argument made. I have no desire to waste my time. I'll answer your question about cultural ignorance, because I overlooked that: I claim the writer is culturally ignorant because he was apparently unaware that the best ending option would come across as committing an atrocity to most players, and that in our storytelling tradition, you can't change the presentation of themes and factions so drastically and still expect the audience to go along with it.

 

Note that I still like the idea of the outcomes, based on the intent I see lurking behind the atrocious writing. That's why I wrote half a book about the Synthesis in order to infuse it with a little sense. In the end though, the writing was bad enough that it ruined whatever interesting concept lurked behind the wall of nonsense. Again, read the second thread linked above in this post if you want explanations.

 

Besides, my forum name starts with an "I", not an "L".

 

Edit:

Here's another write-up of stuff about the ME games which illustrates my points, among a few others, rather comprehensively. I agree with about 90-95% of that. BTW, with regard to the ending, read part 49 linked in the post above this one, that sums things up nicely.

[gothpunkboy89]

You're confusing toxicity with criticism. And I just can't help you there. Nothing that Ieldra posted could be considered toxic. Unless your bar for toxicity is "people who disagree with me."

 

No there is criticism then there is what many players direct towards BioWare. Criticism is as example someone pointing out the initial start of Priority Rannoch is set on very shaky ground. They obviously wanted the conflict between Quarians and Geth to be solved but the inital start to explain it wasn't well done. Then there is Lakus stating very clearly that shooting the Catalyst is BioWare purposefully being trolling ass hole to players and no one calling him out on that but me apparently. To a couple of people I don't remember which exactly claiming how stupid the Beam run is claiming they should have done X or Y which after watching he video is exactly what they did. Coming down to Themikefest claiming all they had to do to distract Harbinger was fire some assault rifles at it. As if some assault rifle fire at a 2KM long Reaper capable of withstanding direct hits from Dreadnought class ships would suddenly be bothered by small arms fire enough to distract it from the one and only purpose it had for leaving the space battle. All because themmikefest wanted BioWare to be idiots in how they set it up. During QMR's 200k character post to me he went onto list many reason why BioWare even putting Shepard into the Quarian conflict was completely idiotic. Many of those reasons were sheer but pulls. Like listing Shepard being saved from a falling elevator by Tali as if that could only possibly happen to Shepard as well as fanboying it up like you would expect someone who picked the name Quarian Master Race would about the Quarians.

 

Choosing to ignore rather key or important bits like the fact without Legion to disable the Geth Dreadnought the Geth would have no reason to leave the group alone meaning that Quarian Marine squad would face a fight to the drive core and back. Which even getting to that point is ignoring the fact that the Geth upgraded by the Reaper Code would not be able to be hacked long enough to get even a 10th of his claimed Quarian Marine forces onto the ship. Given that normal Geth can only be hacked for a short period of time. Only EDI who her self is also a full AI upgraded with Reaper Code fragments as well putting her as an equal to the upgraded Geth would have a chance to breach their firewall and open the door long enough for Shepard's crew to get into it.

 

When you take scraps of existing and established cannon and you use it to construct a completely made up implausible but only to you when looking at other established cannon simply so you can complain about the developer and how they handled something. That is toxicity. When another person calls that long winded fantasy out using in game examples to back up that points and is responded to by calling them a fan boy who knows nothing then clamming the heck up and other people cheering wanting to see QMR insult me some more. That is toxicity.

 

If society has lost the ability to distinguish between constructive criticisms and people generally being a holes. Like the one player who you could almost call it bragging about how stupid BioWare is because they didn't bother to fully look up the melting point of tungsten vs iron. Then society has really reached a new low.

 

And you are right most of Leldra posts could probably not be considered toxic. But look what I had to do to actually get her to respond to my question. Frankly it is over kill to get a simple responds. I shouldn't need to metaphorically slap someone in the face to get a responds to a question. Particularly after I've asked twice the usual way and gotten nothing.

[Iakus]

 

Some see Mass Effect as more than just a game.

 

This whole thing is kind of like Annie Wilkes and Misery, in a way. 

Gee that wasn't offensive at all.    

[Iakus]

Technically, I don't think it's appropriate to call the Catalyst a retcon. There wasn't any con to ret, since the Reapers' origin and purpose were a blank up until very late in ME3's development.

Whether that should have been left blank is an interesting topic.

The Catalyst as an intelligence driving the Reapers is not a retcon (depending on how you interpret Sovereign's "We are each a nation, independent, free of all weakness" line).

 

THe Catalyst being bound to the Citadel, however, is.

[gothpunkboy89]

I've been talking about this stuff for years, so forgive me for not repeating everything I've ever said for your benefit. I've linked to my more elaborate posts several times (for instance, this one.

 

Also, you call that toxic? That if I see something that looks like the work of an incompetent writer, I dare assume that writer is actually incompetent rather than make up excuses? I've written a few doubtful things over the years, but the post you quoted I will maintain as written. You'll find more detailed explanations of those points in this thread. I'll go further and claim that Bioware's more competent writers would agree with me if they could talk freely, because it's so glaringly obvious.

 

As for not answering, I've been here for several years, I don't look in here every day any more. As for you specifically, you have a habit of targeting side issues and avoiding the core of the argument made. I have no desire to waste my time. I'll answer your question about cultural ignorance, because I overlooked that: I claim the writer is culturally ignorant because he was apparently unaware that the best ending option would come across as committing an atrocity to most players, and that in our storytelling tradition, you can't change the presentation of themes and factions so drastically and still expect the audience to go along with it.

 

Note that I still like the idea of the outcomes, based on the intent I see lurking behind the atrocious writing. That's why I wrote half a book about the Synthesis in order to infuse it with a little sense. In the end though, the writing was bad enough that it ruined whatever interesting concept lurked behind the wall of nonsense. Again, read the second thread linked above in this post if you want explanations.

 

Besides, my forum name starts with an "I", not an "L".

 

Edit:

Here's another write-up of stuff about the ME games which illustrates my points, among a few others, rather comprehensively. I agree with about 90-95% of that. BTW, with regard to the ending, read part 49 linked in the post above this one, that sums things up nicely.

 

Repeating yourself is kind of part of being on forums is about. I've actually created templates I can just copy past when regarding specific things. I just wish the quote system on this forum was better. Never thought I would consider Runescape's out dated forums to actually have an advantage.

 

And your claim that Bioware's more competent writers would agree with you if they could talk freely is based on what evidence?

 

I am well aware you do not check in every day hence why I waited until I saw you replying to other posts. Then asked again seeming to be ignored again. That is were I drew issue.

 

Culturally sensitivity is a non issue when creating a story unless you are trying to market that story to a specific culture. No story teller should need to alter the story they want to tell because someone might become offended by it. Unless they are purposefully trying to be offensive with the story which doesn't apply here. Themes do not change nor do factions change. The themes of the game have been pretty straight forward across the entire trilogy. Unless you got some specifics that show other wise. It is hard to argue with generic statements that can mean 1 thing or a dozen other. Factions as well never change but again this is a very broad statement without specifics to me to see any point you are making. By factions I assume you mean Reapers which no they didn't suddenly change.

 

Ending's writings was not that bad. I do agree there are room for improvement in all aspects of the game but the writing isn't terrible. All the complaints about synthesis can fall towards the rest of the endings as well. Space magic which reminded me of a quote I saw some were that I found not that long ago.

 

Clarke's third law

Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic.

[Iakus]

You'd have to go back and make ME2 actually part of the Reaper plot. Shepard could find some Reaper artifact that actually has data or maybe something left behind by the Protheans or from an older cycle, just as we found Prothean tech. It could be exposed by some Volcano erupting or something. Actually the simplest is get some real data from the derelict Reaper in ME2, not just a circuit board labeled "IFF" to open the plot door, I mean Omega 4 Relay.

Funny thing, ME2 was starting to lay groundwork for the never-implemented "dark energy" ending.

[Iakus]

 

Ending's writings was not that bad. I do agree there are room for improvement in all aspects of the game but the writing isn't terrible. All the complaints about synthesis can fall towards the rest of the endings as well. Space magic which reminded me of a quote I saw some were that I found not that long ago.

 

Clarke's third law

Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic.

 

An author's ability to solve a conflict with magic is directly proportional to how well the reader understands said magic

Sanderson's First Law