Revan312 wrote: Why would they abduct thousands of humans (by the way, it was hinted
they were going to need millions) just to liquefy them and build a
reaper out of said human juice... Why?
If the reapers are so past our
level of understanding then why do they need actual humans to make the
new reaper. Their level of technology is so far past our own that the entire plot revolving around the reapers is looking more and more ridiculous. Their large, intricate and complex plans seem moot because 1.) their technology is so advanced one would assume they would be past needing actual organics for reproduction and 2.) there are so many of them. Why they haven't figured out a way to simply clone beings and create reapers out of said clones really doesn't make any sense at all.
Antagonists are rarely, if ever, as powerful as they boast. Nothing is unstoppable. An enemy, no matter how powerful it may appear or perceive itself to be, must have a weakness. If they don't have a weakness, then the writer has created a pretty boring story. Despite the Reapers' impressive size, durability, and lifespan, they must use raw organic material to reproduce. Let me also clarify that a mere copy isn't enough. A single computer virus could wipe out the entire fleet of Reapers if they use the clones you mentioned. Reapers strive for genetic diversity in their offspring in similar way that we do. If humans just copied themselves then one disease could wipe us all out. On a side note, the fact that reapers are more than just machines/AI and seek such diversity makes them a particularly insidious foe. But that's just my opinion.
Also, I think part of what makes Reapers "so past our level of understanding" is that they require the deaths of so many sentient beings to reproduce. We watch thousands, presumably millions, of sentient lives with families, experiences, and feelings being ground up for the sake of creating one other sentient life. I don't know about you, but I have a difficult time understanding how such an act is ethical. However, Reapers believe they are right in pursuing this action.
Revan312 wrote: Also it's hinted at that the collectors themselves were indoctrinated (they were protheans after all), I can't imagine why they couldn't do the same to the human colonists they abduct. Or, why not make them all husks, the collectors create better than average husks, husk monstrosities, exploding husks.. All of which seem to do a pretty good job of killing, so to assume that creating an army out of the humans, an army that is obviously a better investment of resources, is worse than a 50 foot tall skeleton with laser breath is just defending Bioware's story for the sake of it.
Shepard and two other squad members have killed numerous collectors and husks during ME2. Throwing masses of inept bodies at a space station doesn't sound like a good idea to me. Their ineptitude in mass is further proven when you destroy their base while the Collector General employs a strategy similar to yours. Look back at some of the wars throughout history. The battle of Thermopylae, the American Revolution, Vietnam War, Gulf War II, and the War in Afghanistan all point to the commonly held notion that greater numbers don't necessarily yield victory or at least swift victory. A smaller number of developed, trained, and conditioned soldiers is generally better than a lot of resilient, yet mindless bodies.
Revan312 wrote: Also, to anyone saying that it's in an early stage of development and will most likely be encassed with a much larger shell, why make the thing have weapons at this point then?
Personally, I can excuse the Human reaper's weapon choice for the sake of having something that can fight back. But if you require an explanation here you go: It wasn't an intended weapon. It was expelling raw, focused plasma energy in order to defend itself in the best way it knew how. But wait, why didn't Bioware clearly explain this? Oh yeah, it's a
video game. Stopping the action to completely clarify the method/properties/motives of an act is boring. Video gamer designers show/explain the best way they can and move on for the sake of maintaining interest.
Revan312 wrote: Last time I checked I didn't have a mouth that could shoot plasma so obviously that's not part of the "human" genes used...
You're right. You also can't fly in space or grow to a length of 2 km. The Reapers weren't building a human/reaper. They were building a
reaper with human genetic paste comprising the
raw material. It's form and function must still suit that of a Reaper.
Revan312 wrote: Bottom line is your trying really hard to defend a ridiculously contrived plot that was put in place solely to have a larger than life boss fight at the end, one that most think was lame. There was a million ways to go about that ending that would have been both more meaningful and logical. Bioware dropped the ball big time on that ending and as such I felt it ruined any immersive experience I had up to that point.
I don't think the plot is as ridiculous as you make it seem and I don't think you give Bioware sufficient credit. There were not a million ways to go about this. Let's break down the decision making process:
If you read the art book on page 16 it states the following:
"The countless designs for the Reaper-human larva covered a full spectrum between Reaper and human forms. Ultimately, a more human shape was chosen, albeit one that's only partially formed, and of distinctly Reaper construction."
From this we know that Bioware considered many different options for the final boss, likely considerably more than was published in the art book. So the question is, why choose the seemingly metallic human skeleton?
Here's the challenge: How does one make an enemy that 's immediately recognizable as human yet also Reaper in form and function? Oh and it also must be fightable and a perceivable threat even in its embryonic state.
"Why don't we fight a full-blown Reaper?"
Been there. Done that. Got the ME1 t-shirt. Also fighting a more complete Reaper wouldn't be possible for two squadmates and a human. The combined alliance and council fleet had a tough enough time.
"What about a smaller, Reaper-controlled creature sort of like the final boss in ME1?"
Read the first 3 sentences of the previous answer.
"Well, why don't we fight the embryo from the artbook? It looks cooler!"
It's also immobile. While a fight would have looked cooler, it would have been boring fighting a stationary creature.
"Well, why don't we fight [insert fan-baked idea here]?"
Good question! If your idea is so good, then perhaps
you should be creating video games instead of shooting holes in other people's ideas.
So, Bioware requires a non-puppet enemy that explains why Collectors are taking humans alive and intact. It must be able to move, fight, but can also be destroyed on foot. It must be immediately recognized as both human and Reaper but also appear to be in an incomplete form. So, a human skeleton made of an organic metal... But wait, it looks like Terminator! Well, I guess, but a metal human skeleton or metal human likeness is a simple sci-fi concept that did not originate with James Cameron. That's like saying since Star Wars used spaceships then any other idea involving spaceships is a knock-off. Some sci-fi concepts are so basic that it's hard to execute them without looking like the work of someone else.
Revan312 wrote: Games are typically allowed a lot of leniency in regards to story but when the game is touting the plot as the main point of playing the game it deserves just as much scrutiny as a movie or book. The forced feeling concerning the last 10 minutes of the game was on par with BSG's ending.
Entertaining to watch/read does not equal entertaining to play. So no, I don't think the plot deserves as much scrutiny as a book or movie. Mass Effect is narrative/story driven, but it's also a third-person shooter and an RPG. The story is a large point but still one of many large points. To that end, it must be entertaining in regard to gameplay as well.
Revan312 wrote: The last fight is a perfect example of a plot device called a one off, this human reaper appeared for all of 5 minutes and will never be seen again only to drive home in a ham fisted way the explanation of reaper reproduction. If you want to fool yourself into believeing it was appropriate and fit the universe then whatever, but it doesn't change the fact it was a contrived device, period.
The human reaper is not a "one-off" because the same concept is used for the other Reapers. The fact that it appeared human made it a unique artifice but ultimately just one in a long series of artifices created using the same plot device. Btw, you sure have a firm grasp on what does and does not belong in Bioware's universe.
Remove your guise Drew Karpyshyn! I have discovered your true identity!
In summation, I think the propagators of the Terminatorfest need to consider the game beyond their first impressions. If you constantly judge books/music/film/video games solely off your first impression then you're probably overlooking some great media. Think about the concept. Think about the limited ways it could have worked out logically. Then remind yourself that you didn't make the game. If you want a game tailored exactly to your liking then make your own game.
Btw, Revan312, much of what I said isn't directed toward you. I quoted some of what you said but much of my criticism is a broader swipe at some of the general responses to the final boss. I just wanted to add that before you or anybody else claim straw man logical fallacy.
And sorry for the long post. I've been reading these threads since I completed the game and had a lot to say.
Modifié par AdmrlAckb4rFTW, 10 février 2010 - 05:59 .
Retour en haut
