Ce sujet est fermé
primero holodon wrote...
A giant hulking ship like a dreadnought dosn't exactly command the finesse and subtlety that being a spectre demands.
Sierra Oscar wrote...
primero holodon wrote...
A giant hulking ship like a dreadnought dosn't exactly command the finesse and subtlety that being a spectre demands.
Although, to backpeddle on my own objections on the topic, being able to give a complimentary orbital bombardment has it's merits....Noveria comes to mind
Tankfriend wrote...
Logic is entirely irrelevant for determining whether something is a retcon or not. And that's because of the very definition of retcon: A retcon retroactively changes something that was said in a previous member of a series and claims that it has always been the way it is in the new member of the series. And that's it. It is entirely irrelevant how[/i] the retroactive change happens, it is [/i]only important that[/i] a retroactive change happens for something to be a retcon. The issue of that change being logical or illogical in the overall context is an entirely different thingTornadoADV wrote...
1. It IS a retcon, for all was logical, it could of been a shot on the other side of the galaxy that missed it's target and glanced off the side of the planet. Instead there's magically enough info CONSIDERING THE GALAXY IS NOT STATIC AND STAR SYSTEMS AND PLANETS CONSTANTLY CHANGE POSITION IN RELATION TO EACH OTHER. And Cerberus McGuffins the ability to not only judge the distance and angle of the shot, but the shot the time was taken to find not only the weapon but the target that just so happens to be a Reaper. Right.
And given that the Klendagon valley issue in ME2 does not introduce anything that changes or even contradicts what we were told in ME1 but, on the contrary, adds more of the very same story, it by sheer force of definition cannot be a retcon.
It's actually more likely a revision (retroactively adding more information without changing/contradicting earlier information) but depending on how one looks at it even that could be considered a stretch because of the necessary retroactivity:
ME1 already mentioned that the valley on Klendagon was caused by a weapon, so naturally there have to be a weapon and target present. ME2 basically just tells us what the target (that we already suspected) is.
Whatever the point of view on that issue, I personally prefer to make an express distinction between retcon and revision, because they are working in very distinct ways. But if you see revision as a subtype of retcon like wiki does for example, then I'll accept this point as a revisionary[/i] retcon. But even then, it is by all means no true[/i] retcon.
I give you the point of the entire calculation business being quite a lucky stroke for Cerberus (though it would not be impossible given sufficient funds, processing- and manpower) but sadly that is what we are stuck with as far as the story is concerned. You obviously don't like it but then again one doesn't have to like everything about a story.Well, back to the business of retcon and logic. As I have already said, ME2 clearly retconned the ME1 ending sequence because it showed us that a Reaper obviously can take far more firepower without getting destroyed outright than it could in ME1. That retcon might not be logical when looking back to ME1, but as I have said above, a retcon does not have to be logical.2. a.) Normandy killed one with a single shot, they aren't anything without their shields and Turians who can't aim.
Apart from that, there still is the issue of Sovereign getting "killed" by Shepard and how that might have impacted the entire scene afterwards. I guess we won't really know about this until Bioware decides to finally tell us more about the entire "Assuming control"/"Reaper spirit-whatever-transfer" business. Until then, we are stuck with ME2 retconning the Reapers into being able to take more damage than ME1 showed us.I neither claimed that that would inevitably[/i] have to mean something nor that Reapers are Mass Relays. But seriously, if you are capable of building something that can resist a supernova, wouldn't you try to use that technology for something else as well? It does not have to mean that Reapers can withstand a supernova, I give you that, but it does provide a serious display of ability and power.b.) You keep stating like the Mass Relay getting shunted by a Super Nova means something, it doesn't, Reapers are not Mass Relays.
Let's just make a very simple hypothetical analogy here:
-> You make your armour from material A.
-> Then you research a technology to make something else from material B.
-> B is superior to A in every aspect.
-> What exactly would argue against adapting that tech and exchanging A for B entirely?And? That is not a reason to dismiss these details as if they don't have any significance at all. They actually do their job quite well - driving on the story in some cases and adding more support to the power and superiority of the Reapers which in turn is a prime factor and motive in ME's story line.c.) McGuffin story device. d.) McGuffin story device
Come on, you must have heard of the saying that "quantity is a quality of its own". Reapers already are superior technologically and then they also come in large numbers - the combination of both quantity and[/i] quality is about the epitome of superiority you can have in respect to raw military power. In respect to the galactic forces, quantity is about the only quality they have until they can seriously boost their technology. It's not been said for nought throughout the series so far that it would take a united galaxy to beat the Reapers.e.) Numbers mean what, exactly?
You seem to miss out on the fact that ramming and destroying a ship without taking a scratch yourself or even getting slowed down by it is quite a remarkable feat in and off itself already, even if you have the advantage in weight and size.f.) Turians can't shoot straight and Sov didn't have time to ****** around, so he rammed them, that doesn't exactly scream "Juggernaut" to me, that screams "LEARN TO AIM FROM A PLACE BESIDES THE STORMTROOPER ACADEMY OF MARKSMENSHIP!"
Look... the Council is easily one of the most hated groups in the entire ME series so far from a player perspective, largely due to their incapability to actually get a move on and leave their "It'll be alright, you'll manage by yourself." and "We won't get involved"-dreamworld. That said, why should they even care a bit about finding a massive mass accelerator cannon when they never want to enter into any[/i] conflict in the first place? Even if there were rumours that their enemies took that cannon and got it working again they would likely "dismiss that claim" (to aptly cite the Turian Councilor) until they got hit by it for the first time.4.) Another Cop-Out, got it.
I'm sorry that it is getting to this low a level of arguments. Firstly, I already admitted some points to you as far as they seem to be acceptable to me. Secondly, there are quite a lot of sensible points on my side of the argument that you don't even seem to consider but conversely just throw away as "cop-outs". Thirdly, stay cool. There is no reason to start shouting and sounding angry as if I were beating you to death or anything.3.) Cop-Out because you can't admit I'm right, got it.
I suppose it might come down to a combination of this. The galactic forces are fighting open space battles against the Reapers and might even get a few costly tactical victories out of it for the first few battles (let's assume the Reapers send out small scouting groups for example) but they know they would eventually lose the war so they simply fight on to provide Shepard with the time to whip out that "You lose!"-button for the Reapers.TornadoADV wrote...
It just comes down to the fact that ME2 is extremely poor story telling compared to ME1 and isn't even logically consistent to it's own canon material, all for the "WOW" factor to bring in the FPS/TPS drones. I shifted between bouts of cringing and grinding my teeth at how much they slaughtered their own lore for a cheap thrill.
So, either they correct themselves in ME3 for the final battle and there will be a massive space battle between the Galaxy and the Reapers with lessons learned from ME1 (not ME2) where there will be visible and constant use of smart tactics (Dropping of local shield arrays for Disruptor Torpedos and Nuclear Missiles, a combination of broadside and main-gun formations so the broadside line can screen the main-gun line from direct charges, having Frigates and Fighters attacking the weaker armored undersides of the Reapers.)
Or we won't and it will never happen and/or be a slaughter while Shepard magically finds a way to destroy the entire Reaper fleet in one swoop with a McGuffin.
Modifié par Tankfriend, 03 mars 2010 - 11:32 .
This.addiction21 wrote...
OInly if it comes with a waffle bar.
Sierra Oscar wrote...
being able to give a complimentary orbital bombardment has it's merits
Varenus Luckmann wrote...
This.addiction21 wrote...
OInly if it comes with a waffle bar.
Waffle bar, or no deal.
And would be shot down due to some bs excuse. Joker "Too much snow commander we can not get a clear lock"
Modifié par Sierra Oscar, 06 mars 2010 - 12:16 .
Retour en haut
