inherit
1480
0
1,080
gothpunkboy89
2,311
September 2016
gothpunkboy89
|
Post by gothpunkboy89 on Feb 20, 2018 19:22:50 GMT
If you don't have a physical form and you want to appear as least threatening as possible what form would you pick? And outside of that there is practical reasons. Reusing an existing game model saves time and money as all they would have to is add an effect to it. Same reason why in Star Trek series the same prop will show up in a dozen different episodes doing a dozen different things. Yeah, a child isn't threatening, but then again the Catalyst also wants to be taken seriously. And I have trouble taking some random twerp seriously when I'm deciding the fate of the entire galaxy  I get that reusing the kid model probably saved assets developing the game, but as a player I enjoyed the indoctrination theory's explanation of the kid, so even though the theory isn't canon I like to incorporate that little bit into my headcanon. Just a way to enhance my playthroughs. I think the being that is the guiding intelligence behind the Reapers should be taken seriously even if it appeared as a giant talking sex toy. |
|
inherit
1227
0
Member is Online
3,700
Phantom
2,668
August 2016
deathscepter
Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, KOTOR, Jade Empire
|
Post by Phantom on Feb 20, 2018 19:26:13 GMT
I seem to recall hearing someone say at some point (could be like a year or two ago) that the Catalyst might be Harbinger. Harbinger was the first Reaper, after all, so perhaps the Intelligence put itself into the first Reaper. Then, it leaves Earth physically so it can appear to Shepard on the Crucible. It's an ancient AI, so I can imagine it create a holographic projection of a human child at will. Obviously this is conjecture but it would be one more reason not to trust him. It would be funny as hell if we actually learn that is the truth or the Starbrat is Sovereign while playing as a different player character. Well This just being me, Having Sovereign as the starbrat in a thoughtful way, will not negate ME1 essence also having Harbringer with a bigger role with a potential 3rd Reaper. And Keeping with their supposed Eternal natures, having their A.I. hiding in a hidden area of the Citadel or the mythical Dark Citadel. So even if you kill a Reaper, they can live in a different form and could be reborn. |
|
inherit
1480
0
1,080
gothpunkboy89
2,311
September 2016
gothpunkboy89
|
Post by gothpunkboy89 on Feb 20, 2018 20:51:30 GMT
Never said it would kill the entire galaxy only that it would be more interesting if it did. How ever it would kill all the technology in the galaxy. Which would have drastic and heavy consequences due to that. Because entire basis of society is now build on technology. Removing all the technology from the galaxy would be the equivalent of removing all the load baring beams from a building. The result would be it collapses on it self and kills most of the people in it. And the rebuilding would take centuries as they would have to literally rebuild society from the ground up and rediscover technology. That was the implications of the destroy ending in the vanilla game. That is the ending and the consequences that they dropped to give people the happily ever after endings of the EC. The wave was given space magic properties to only effect Reapers and some how not all the other Reaper technology the entire galaxy is build on. Suddenly technology they didn't understand it a simple fix it problem. All the problems and issues are hand waved away just as much as you like to complain about the Synthesis ending. Only unlike that ending the hand waving makes even less sense due to the consequences of that choice that by every scrap of logic says should have happened but didn't. The Reapers still exist and are capable of rebuilding the Mass Relays. Technology hasn't been effected so all the previous technology that society was build on is still there to be used and relied on. The logic that because there is a chance they might decide to kill everyone can be equally applied to the Geth or Turian or Asari or Humanity or Krogan as well. Never know when the Asari might think something needs to be fixed and they are still massively more powerful then any other race. Best kill them all to prevent any problem from happening. TIM is walking proof that Humanity needs to be wiped out because never know if they get to powerful they might try to kill and subjugate all the other races. Synthesis is Liara's hypothetical conversation with EDI made reality. The fundamental nature of life has changed. Before 1+1=2 but now 1+1=3. The entire point of the Harvest was to go after races hundreds or even thousands of years before they would reach the point of no return for the conflict to escalate. But now everything is different. All the old equations are useless like old medical papers declaring that the human body is full of humors that have to be balanced to be healthy. It would take centuries for the Catalyst to see the effects and to study if other solutions would work. In that time the races would be more then able to advance in technology. Meaning even if the Reapers decided to attack again they would be met with an even more populated galaxy full of beings nearly if not on par with them in terms of technology. At it's best it would be a costly war that would see the Reapers destroyed. At it's worse the Reapers would finally see there is no solution and would wipe out all life in the galaxy. Leaving only the Reapers as eternal examples of the folly of organic life. Eternal proof organic was never able to stop it self from reaching to far and causing their own destruction. The Reapers in their actions are no different then the actions of Black Ops or intelligence agencies on any living race. Deceitful, indoctrination of people to their believes and willing to murder at will. All knowingly done and with support from the governments of their races. The only difference is the scale as the Reapers have been around much longer they have a much higher body count. Why is Humanity allowed to live when leaders knowingly and willingly will kill others to suit their needs? But the Reapers need to die when they do it? A few points. I'm not going to address everything. I see how you're already wrong in multiple instances. First, the Reapers do gain something. They gain numbers. Once upon a time, there was only the Intelligence. It turned on its creators and made the first Reaper, Harbinger. With every harvest, their numbers grow. Hence, your assertion that they gain nothing is dead wrong. They continue to grow more powerful with every cycle. Second, it does NOT kill all technology. Guns still seemed to work fine. The Normandy got up and running. The Citadel was rebuilt. The mass effect relays were brought back online. Everything in the slideshow suggests that, no, technology was not destroyed unless you chose the low EMS route. In that case, you're playing Shepard as a total dick anyway so no surprise. The rest is just bullshit. None of the other races have the power or interest in doing what you assert. The Reapers not only do but have been doing so for at least a billion years. Sorry, buddy, but your arguments are completely false. I'm not here to tell people not to like whatever ending they want or even argue with them over it. You choose to argue and so here we are. You've got no proof. Accept that and drop the argument. I can tell you flat out that I've never seen a single argument you've presented that has even remotely swayed me. In fact, it's made me think even more about it to get why I'll never buy into what you're selling. Mind you, I'm talking YOU specifically. I give no fucks over what ending anyone chooses but you have made it your personal goal to convert everyone to your way of thinking. How's that working out for you? What is the point of reproduction to beings that are immortal? They don't have the instinctive drive to reproduce that organic life is build with. They only create more Reapers as a way to store the races they harvest. Reapers are the ultimate recyclers. They don't harvest cycles simply to reproduce. That is a by product of the harvest not the entire point. Just like sweet whey is the byproduct of creating cheddar cheese. Oh yes EC changes it to that. But how does the wave only effect Reapers and nothing more? How are the Reapers, EDI and the Geth so damaged they can't be repaired by their own internal systems but the entire computer system of the Normandy is only temporarily damaged? This has the implication that not only are EDI and the Geth able to be easily repaired but so would the Reapers. And since indoctrination is independent of Reaper's being around any and all left over Cerberus Agents or any other indoctrinated sleeper agents would only need access to the "dead" Reapers and they would be able to repair and restart them. Your logic is that they might some day in the future. Well the Asari might some day in the future arrive at that conclusion as well. The Reapers are doing it now because they have reached that conclusion. There is nothing to say the Asari might not reach that conclusion one day as well. In fact you could put up a fairly decent argument that if the Asari as the most mature race had only grabbed for power and put themselves on the top of the hierarchy with total rule over other races a number of ugly incidences wouldn't have happened. The Morning War wouldn't have happened sparing the lives of millions of Quarians and preventing the emerging of the Geth. Which would have handicapped Sovergein's attempt to kick start the Harvest. With their total control the Batarians wouldn't have their issues with the Alliance and would not only have prevented the Skyrillian Blitz but also would have been given much sooner knowledge of the Reapers and been able to help evacuate resulting in less troops during the Reaper's initial invasion. Without the need to hide their Prothean tech and worry about losing their position in the galaxy they could have flaunted it and spend more time researching it. Resulting in the potential or the Crucible to have been build, ready and waiting for the Reapers. The argument of no proof applies to you as well. You prescribe to the same circumstantial if not completely made up in your head logic you say I use. Case in point the argument that the key reason they harvest cycles is reproduction. Or that they could suddenly change their mind based only on the chance that they might. Which would equally apply to every race in the galaxy. It is just as impossible to say the Asari will never become blood thirsty conquerors that would wipe out entire races that challenge them. Just as it is impossible to say the Reapers might never change their mind. None of my reasoning has done anything to sway you? Well that would be disheartening if I even vaugly considered the idea I would be capable of swaying you. I feel I have a better chance at coming in first place at a Kosher cooking contest by serving up pulled pork sandwiches cooked in milk. They would at least let me in the door first. |
|
abedsbrother
N3
Games: Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquisition, Baldur's Gate, Neverwinter Nights, Jade Empire, Mass Effect Andromeda, Anthem, Mass Effect Legendary Edition
Origin: Abedsbrother
XBL Gamertag: DonDiego256
Posts: 442 Likes: 992
inherit
516
0
992
abedsbrother
442
August 2016
abedsbrother
Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquisition, Baldur's Gate, Neverwinter Nights, Jade Empire, Mass Effect Andromeda, Anthem, Mass Effect Legendary Edition
Abedsbrother
DonDiego256
|
Post by abedsbrother on Feb 20, 2018 20:57:30 GMT
I voted no. I have said this before: The end of Mass Effect 3 is not a bad ending, but it was a disappointing end to the trilogy. Taken on its own, the end is actually pretty good; stick it in some other games and it works quite well. The issue of course, is it came at the end of three games and was supposed to conclude Shepard's story, but it did not do it in a satisfying way. I will also say this: the extended cut made some endings better, and made some endings worse. Start New Game in ME3. See it through, get to the ending. It's still false and untrue to the narrative, doesn't resonate with all the core themes and the one it does "organics vs synthetics" it describes contrivedly, illogically, and it's not a good ending. Extended Cut though, it does remedy issues such as the themes outside of organics vs synthetics unless you pick Synthesis. I like the endings myself. The issue for me was that the whole "organics vs. synthetics" was always AN issue in the Mass Effect universe, but I never saw it as THE issue that was the point of the trilogy. The AI on the Citadel funneling credits (ME1), the AI on the moon (ME1), that ship whose AI massacred the crew (ME2), the saga of the MSV Corsica (ME2) the whole Geth-Quarian relationship, EDI - it all makes sense to me, but I never saw it as "the point." Given that the games were conceived as a trilogy designed to address issues related to Kurzweil and the singularity (according to Casey Hudson), I think Mass Effect 3's issues were entirely the fault of deadlines and budgets. They can't be thrown out of the window entirely, but there were pressures that unfortunately had an impact. I also think the original trilogy should have been 5 games, not three, but still leading to the same ending that we have - but that's another issue entirely. |
|
inherit
♨ Retired
24
0
26,308
themikefest
15,636
August 2016
themikefest
21,655
15,426
|
Post by themikefest on Feb 20, 2018 22:06:18 GMT
Yeah, a child isn't threatening, but then again the Catalyst also wants to be taken seriously. And I have trouble taking some random twerp seriously when I'm deciding the fate of the entire galaxy  I get that reusing the kid model probably saved assets developing the game, but as a player I enjoyed the indoctrination theory's explanation of the kid, so even though the theory isn't canon I like to incorporate that little bit into my headcanon. Just a way to enhance my playthroughs. Its too bad the thing didn't change forms when talking about the choices. Something like what Leviathan did in the dlc. The thing takes the form of Anderson when talking about destroy. Tim's form when talking about control. Saren's form when talking about synthesis. Not sure what form it would take if ME1 wasn't played. Maybe the edibot? When first seeing the thing, why couldn't it take the form of Ashley/Kaidan, the one who was left on Virmire? What if the player didn't play ME1? Then have the thing take the form of the LI, if Shepard has one. If no LI, it could be a squadmate who died in ME3 or ME2 or the character who holds up Shepard's nameplate. How about taking the form of space hamster?  I would be curious what the answer would be from the thing if Shepard were able to ask it why its in the form of a human child? |
|
inherit
1480
0
1,080
gothpunkboy89
2,311
September 2016
gothpunkboy89
|
Post by gothpunkboy89 on Feb 21, 2018 7:36:38 GMT
Start New Game in ME3. See it through, get to the ending. It's still false and untrue to the narrative, doesn't resonate with all the core themes and the one it does "organics vs synthetics" it describes contrivedly, illogically, and it's not a good ending. Extended Cut though, it does remedy issues such as the themes outside of organics vs synthetics unless you pick Synthesis. I like the endings myself. The issue for me was that the whole "organics vs. synthetics" was always AN issue in the Mass Effect universe, but I never saw it as THE issue that was the point of the trilogy. The AI on the Citadel funneling credits (ME1), the AI on the moon (ME1), that ship whose AI massacred the crew (ME2), the saga of the MSV Corsica (ME2) the whole Geth-Quarian relationship, EDI - it all makes sense to me, but I never saw it as "the point." Given that the games were conceived as a trilogy designed to address issues related to Kurzweil and the singularity (according to Casey Hudson), I think Mass Effect 3's issues were entirely the fault of deadlines and budgets. They can't be thrown out of the window entirely, but there were pressures that unfortunately had an impact. I also think the original trilogy should have been 5 games, not three, but still leading to the same ending that we have - but that's another issue entirely. The Reapers simply represent a more pressing threat. While at the same time the issue is more a background at this point. Sort of like a broken fridge is more pressing matter then an A/C unit that is starting to fail. Yea not having A/C is bad but it isn't a major issue yet and the lack of your ability to store cold food is much more important right now. It also seems to me that people confuse protagonist motivation with antagonist motivation. To Shepard the Reapers are a group of super advanced cuttlefish that show up every 50,000 years to wipe out all organic and synthetic life above a certain level of technological development. They don't offer any explanation why and show no signs of wanting to stop. So he/she sets out to try and stop them. The Reapers how ever only exist because of the inability for organic and synthetic life to peacefully coexist and so the harvest cycle was started as the next best thing to wipe out all life forever. Countless races and countless races and societies have fallen into the same repeating pattern. There is no point in explaining anything to the current cycle because it is already proven they will repeat the same problem. Only at the end do these paths intersect with each other as Shepard stands before the Catalyst. The Catalyst explains the reason the Reapers were created and why they act like they do. Suddenly all those trivial problems (even without Reapers to greater or lesser extents) are shown how big a ripple they will create in time. And the Catalyst admits the solution it created will eventually fail with Shepard being living proof of it. Both stories are then concluded as Shepard and the Catalyst chart a new path that the galaxy will take. One that stops the Reapers from harvesting and one that will provide a new if not better solution to the organic and synthetic conflict. Ties the game up fairly good to me. |
|
inherit
738
0
4,633
Link"Guess"ski
3,882
August 2016
linkenski
Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, KOTOR, Mass Effect Andromeda
Linkenski
asblinkenski
Linkenski
|
Post by Link"Guess"ski on Feb 21, 2018 14:29:02 GMT
I like the endings myself. The issue for me was that the whole "organics vs. synthetics" was always AN issue in the Mass Effect universe, but I never saw it as THE issue that was the point of the trilogy. If everyone could just agree on this... Le sigh. But thinking a bit about the ending again the other day, it actually struck me: whether it's Synthetics vs Organics or this that and the other, I actually think the crux of the issue is the ending trying to explain and justify the Reapers for the player/protagonist to follow along with. No matter what the actual reason may have been, even if it made more sense to the central theme of the trilogy, it's really tough to justify a billion-year-old cyclic genocide solution for ANYTHING, and the entire problem with the ending which starts at the Starchild sequence (previously it was just pretty blatant continuity flaws, but nothing in the way of whatever message the trilogy has) is in the fact that Shepard cannot actually debate its attempt at self-justification nor does he even seem to care or heck, he doesn't even NOTICE (AKA: The writer didn't notice!! This is the issue.), because it provides no proper resolve for Shepard as a character who represents the player, a strong-willed protagonist and the voice of the people as he just effectively brought everyone together with peace or destruction in his wake. Either way, he should have a strong voice and strong viewpoints and right now he's struggling to stay alive. If his last words would've been anything it sure as hell should not have been "I...don't know." or "Let's get this over with." |
|
inherit
2044
0
Nov 10, 2016 16:47:07 GMT
10,275
AnDromedary
4,446
Nov 10, 2016 16:30:09 GMT
November 2016
andromedary
|
Post by AnDromedary on Feb 21, 2018 21:05:34 GMT
I like the endings myself. The issue for me was that the whole "organics vs. synthetics" was always AN issue in the Mass Effect universe, but I never saw it as THE issue that was the point of the trilogy. If everyone could just agree on this... Le sigh. But thinking a bit about the ending again the other day, it actually struck me: whether it's Synthetics vs Organics or this that and the other, I actually think the crux of the issue is the ending trying to explain and justify the Reapers for the player/protagonist to follow along with. No matter what the actual reason may have been, even if it made more sense to the central theme of the trilogy, it's really tough to justify a billion-year-old cyclic genocide solution for ANYTHING, and the entire problem with the ending which starts at the Starchild sequence (previously it was just pretty blatant continuity flaws, but nothing in the way of whatever message the trilogy has) is in the fact that Shepard cannot actually debate its attempt at self-justification nor does he even seem to care or heck, he doesn't even NOTICE (AKA: The writer didn't notice!! This is the issue.), because it provides no proper resolve for Shepard as a character who represents the player, a strong-willed protagonist and the voice of the people as he just effectively brought everyone together with peace or destruction in his wake. Either way, he should have a strong voice and strong viewpoints and right now he's struggling to stay alive. If his last words would've been anything it sure as hell should not have been "I...don't know." or "Let's get this over with." I really liked Drew's original idea for a justification for what the reapers did. It wasn't fleshed out yet but it was by far the most convincing and elegant one I've ever hear. The idea was - in broad strokes - that element zero is destabilizing the fabric of space time and the reapers are trying to find a solution for that, which - and that was the part he never wrote - lead to the cycles. If the catalyst had come up to me and had said that the reapers have seen galaxies implode/ripped apart by the mass effect (ideally showing me, like the leviathans showed stuff to shepard) and that they believe the accumulation of eezo and the resulting forces of the mass effect would rip apart this galaxy within the next couple of hundred cycles and eventually the universe itself, I certainly would have listened. They could have said that the Haestrom sun was one of the first incidences to see this catastrophe on a smaller scale. And who knows, maybe civilizations on our level of the cycle are about to discover some form of technology that would accelerate the decline if used, so we need to be purged. At the same time, the reapers think that a possible solution might be a species of some special biotics, that can control eezo and the mass effect to an extent that they could stabilize things and the reapers are trying to "bread" such a species through the cycles. Hence the harvesting and the information gathering. I don't know, just ideas off the top of my head, certainly not thought through but I think the concept had a lot of potential. What I liked about it was that it brings the entire existence of the reapers, the cycles, the war, the crucible, everything, it brings it back to eezo and the mass effect, to the main premise that this entire scifi universe is built upon, hell, even to the title itself. So yea, not sure if it would have come out right (and certainly, youd have wanted to prepare for it much more throughout ME2/3, not just introduce it with the catalyst himself) but I agree that "organics vs. synthetics" was always a B-plot in the trilogy, an important one for sure but still, a B-plot. So in the end, Drew's original concept made much more sense to me. |
|
inherit
♨ Retired
24
0
26,308
themikefest
15,636
August 2016
themikefest
21,655
15,426
|
Post by themikefest on Feb 21, 2018 21:20:26 GMT
I would have it where Leviathan are the one's that had its minions build the reapers to build the relays and Citadel to make traveling throughout the galaxy more efficient. The reapers built a relay to use in darkspace, when they're not building relays. They also have a giant space station in darkspace that they attach to when they go into sleep mode. Harbinger is the shop foreman that gets updated every now and then to control the other reapers to do what needs to be done. The one time they went to update Harbinger, something went wrong causing Harbinger's programming to have the reapers wipeout Leviathan. Every 50 000 years, or I would make it every 500 000 years or 5 million years, they return to the Milky Way to use the organics to help build another relay and reaper.
When Shepard encounters Leviathan, it says that by destroying Harbinger, it breaks its control over the other reapers causing the reapers to stop and go back to darkspace.
Just a thought.
|
|
inherit
1480
0
1,080
gothpunkboy89
2,311
September 2016
gothpunkboy89
|
Post by gothpunkboy89 on Feb 22, 2018 1:51:12 GMT
I like the endings myself. The issue for me was that the whole "organics vs. synthetics" was always AN issue in the Mass Effect universe, but I never saw it as THE issue that was the point of the trilogy. If everyone could just agree on this... Le sigh. But thinking a bit about the ending again the other day, it actually struck me: whether it's Synthetics vs Organics or this that and the other, I actually think the crux of the issue is the ending trying to explain and justify the Reapers for the player/protagonist to follow along with. No matter what the actual reason may have been, even if it made more sense to the central theme of the trilogy, it's really tough to justify a billion-year-old cyclic genocide solution for ANYTHING, and the entire problem with the ending which starts at the Starchild sequence (previously it was just pretty blatant continuity flaws, but nothing in the way of whatever message the trilogy has) is in the fact that Shepard cannot actually debate its attempt at self-justification nor does he even seem to care or heck, he doesn't even NOTICE (AKA: The writer didn't notice!! This is the issue.), because it provides no proper resolve for Shepard as a character who represents the player, a strong-willed protagonist and the voice of the people as he just effectively brought everyone together with peace or destruction in his wake. Either way, he should have a strong voice and strong viewpoints and right now he's struggling to stay alive. If his last words would've been anything it sure as hell should not have been "I...don't know." or "Let's get this over with." We already have small scale examples on Earth. The most effective means to help endangered animal populations is to allow people to hunt them for a fee. More specifically choosing old, injured or overly aggressive but also picking a certain percentage of the herd each year to be targeted. That money is then distributed to local land owners who are incentivized to set aside land for those animals to live on and to protect them from poachers. It sounds counter intuitive but the best way to protect the Rhino population is to allow people to kill a very heavily regulated number of them every year. Reapers are doing the same thing just on a much grander scale. Harvest humanity (old rhino) while ignoring the Yhang (young rhino) all to protect organic life from itself. What is necessary and what is morally acceptable are not always the same thing. And more often then you would think you have to do what is necessary rather then what is morally right. Shepard's lack of argument (not that it would have a point) is understandable considering his situation. He is bruised, bloody and on death's doorstep. Arguably the only reason Shepard is still alive is due to all the cybernetic implants from Cerberus. He just witnessed the death of a close father figure with Anderson and the single shred of hope with the Crucible failed. It never fired and so all the hope of the galaxy and in Shepard was extinguished. By the time the Catalyst arrives Shepard is broken and all hope is lost he failed to protect everyone or anyone. At that point the Catalyst provides the basic necessary information and offers Shepard options to resolve the situation. Shepard is in no position to debate or argue. The entire hope of the galaxy failed and now the glimmers of hope are showing again. Shepard would accept them because without those choices the galaxy is doomed. Now if things were different when they met I could understand this complaint. If the galaxy was fighting the Reapers on an equal footing but the war was going to be a long and drawn out fight that it would almost be a pyrrhic victory. And during that even battle to the death Shepard found the Catalyst and was negotiating how to end this war before both groups wiped each other out. Yes him not debating and arguing against the Catalyst's logic (regardless of how little impact it would actually have) wouldn't make sense. But within context of the ending we got him not bothering to argue because the choices are the only hope for the galaxy in the face of an overwhelming enemy makes sense. |
|
inherit
♨ Retired
24
0
26,308
themikefest
15,636
August 2016
themikefest
21,655
15,426
|
Post by themikefest on Feb 22, 2018 2:23:49 GMT
Interesting.
Anderson is a father figure for Shepard? Not for my Shepard. My Shepard didn't care about the guy.
So if Shepard is in no position to debate or argue, then why didn't he/she make any effort to get a hold of Hackett to get to that location to have someone who can debate/argue with the thing?
Since ME is all about choices, why couldn't Shepard call for a shuttle to take him/her back to the Normandy with Shepard shooting the tube as the shuttle flies away? Why couldn't Shepard have the shuttle pick him/her up, making sure edibot is on it, so the platform can take control of the reapers, if its able to. If the platform is destroyed on the beam run, Shepard is the one to pull the handles. With the green, call for a shuttle. The shuttle then heads down to get one of the many bodies that is seen when Shepard walks to the console. The body is thrown in the beam of green.
|
|
invisibleman
N2
i'm just begging for change at the liqueur store... *face palm* no, not really.
Games: Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquisition, KOTOR, Baldur's Gate, Jade Empire, Mass Effect Andromeda
Origin: CasperTheLich
Posts: 108 Likes: 93
inherit
8428
0
Jun 17, 2018 10:23:04 GMT
93
invisibleman
i'm just begging for change at the liqueur store... *face palm* no, not really.
108
May 15, 2017 13:54:24 GMT
May 2017
invisibleman
Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquisition, KOTOR, Baldur's Gate, Jade Empire, Mass Effect Andromeda
CasperTheLich
|
Post by invisibleman on Feb 22, 2018 3:13:04 GMT
IMHO, objectively the entire plot for the ending of ME3 is garbage, and the extended cut patched a few bits, but the major flaws are still there. i just can't take anything seriously from, say... the beam-run to the final ending sequence and then those ending slides too. you need to be able to transition from part A, to B, and finally to C... and do so clearly, without contradicting yourself. not only did they completely fail here, they even managed to contradict the lore mass effect had managed to build upon up to this point & as well as the narrative of the entire series, even in the extended cut they failed to really fix anything.
now, i think i've related my arguments a few dozen times in other places here and there (though not in this particular thread, unless i'm forgetting something), including the old forums... so i figure you're all sick of em. so i'll just stop here.
|
|
larsdt
N3
Games: Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins
Origin: larsdt
Posts: 562 Likes: 4,567
inherit
8201
0
Nov 12, 2024 19:26:05 GMT
4,567
larsdt
562
May 2017
larsdt
Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins
larsdt
|
Post by larsdt on Feb 22, 2018 3:15:06 GMT
From a writing perspective I think the problem is the Reapers themselves. All organic aliens except the Racni in the MET are basically avatars of human history and culture. The Rachni are sentient but they are not mentioned in the ending. The Geth have shared memory and consciousness, characteristics I found very interesting in the overall story but in regards to the ending they are just synthetics. The aliens in the game are "guys in rubber suits" so we can identify with them. However, the Reapers have to be so "alien" to make them believable as the superior and ultimate threat to galactic life. We are not supposed to be able to identify with them as they would be dumbed down to the level of those resisting them. This makes it a free-for-all for writing the ending and gamers trying to figure out what the hell it all means. On a personal/subjective note yes, I think the writing got out of hand. Add to that the plot holes and the promise of unique endings reflecting Shepard's choices during the trilogy and it ended up a mess. And so, the speculation about Reaper motives continues and the red, blue and green keeps us chasing our own tail until we say f*ck it, I'll go with EDI and Joker. They are as cute as kitten gifs.  |
|
inherit
1480
0
1,080
gothpunkboy89
2,311
September 2016
gothpunkboy89
|
Post by gothpunkboy89 on Feb 22, 2018 3:26:44 GMT
Interesting. Anderson is a father figure for Shepard? Not for my Shepard. My Shepard didn't care about the guy. So if Shepard is in no position to debate or argue, then why didn't he/she make any effort to get a hold of Hackett to get to that location to have someone who can debate/argue with the thing? Since ME is all about choices, why couldn't Shepard call for a shuttle to take him/her back to the Normandy with Shepard shooting the tube as the shuttle flies away? Why couldn't Shepard have the shuttle pick him/her up, making sure edibot is on it, so the platform can take control of the reapers, if its able to. If the platform is destroyed on the beam run, Shepard is the one to pull the handles. With the green, call for a shuttle. The shuttle then heads down to get one of the many bodies that is seen when Shepard walks to the console. The body is thrown in the beam of green. I would agree if you ignore every cut scene and interaction you have with him. I seem to remember in the final bit of the first level Shepard promises to bring every ship and fleet they can get their hands on to come back for Anderson when he chooses to stay behind. Now if you want to split hairs you could say father figure is to strong a term but regardless Anderson is someone Shepard looks up to and has a lot of respect for. Your fantasy land of ignoring what is shown in game doesn't undercut my statement.  That is why Shepard can't contact Hackett. No Omnitool and no helmet with communications. The only one with a communication head set was Anderson and he dies before Shepard is brought up. In fact Shepard collapses in a heap after pulling their hand back and showing it covered in their own blood. And even if he could all while during the Catalyst's scenes the background shows the shattered hulls of countless ships in the shield and sword fleets. Showing rather directly the Reapers are decimating the combined Fleets of the galaxy. Even in EC when Hackett orders ships to intercept Harbinger as it breaks off to go after the ground troops no ship was shown to be able to stop or even slow it down. The Normandy is only able to show up to extract a few people relying on Harbinger not wanting to cause a power surge into the Citadel and damage it. Any ship sent would be blown out of the sky by the Reapers at best. Or at worse the Catalyst wouldn't be interested in any random person anymore then the leaders of China would want to meet Bob the Wal-Mart greater to discuss trade deals. Shepard's death was foreshadowed earlier in the game with the dream sequences. The Hero's Death is a pretty common trope with stories like this and it was the most obvious aspect of the ending. Shepard is broken, bleeding on deaths door. No way to communicate and the one hope of the galaxy dead. To quote Dr. Leonard Church Director of Project Freelancer "I don't give a damn about your committee and its opinions of my work! Have you forgotten sir, we were at war? A fight with an alien race for the very survival of our species. I feel I must remind you that it is an undeniable, and may I say a fundamental quality of man, that when faced with extinction, every alternative is preferable." |
|
inherit
1480
0
1,080
gothpunkboy89
2,311
September 2016
gothpunkboy89
|
Post by gothpunkboy89 on Feb 22, 2018 3:28:04 GMT
IMHO, objectively the entire plot for the ending of ME3 is garbage, and the extended cut patched a few bits, but the major flaws are still there. i just can't take anything seriously from, say... the beam-run to the final ending sequence and then those ending slides too. you need to be able to transition from part A, to B, and finally to C... and do so clearly, without contradicting yourself. not only did they completely fail here, they even managed to contradict the lore mass effect had managed to build upon up to this point & as well as the narrative of the entire series, even in the extended cut they failed to really fix anything. now, i think i've related my arguments a few dozen times in other places here and there (though not in this particular thread, unless i'm forgetting something), including the old forums... so i figure you're all sick of em. so i'll just stop here. Oh please do go on because every time I see someone post stuff like you I notice large gaps in the story. Facts omitted or reduced and context of events fundamentally altered or approached in an overly simple way. |
|
inherit
♨ Retired
24
0
26,308
themikefest
15,636
August 2016
themikefest
21,655
15,426
|
Post by themikefest on Feb 22, 2018 4:18:54 GMT
regardless Anderson is someone Shepard looks up to and has a lot of respect for. You can say your Shepard respects and likes the guy, but mine doesn't. And yet Shepard can hear Hackett talk to him/her, and before that, Shepard and Anderson were able to communicate with no problem until some interference cut them off. You know Hackett says the same thing before the extended cut was released, right? I would have had Shepard make an attempt to contact Hackett after passing out. I mean time is not on Hackett's side. Wouldn't it be funny if Shepard passed out again before making a choice. What would Hackett do? Pvt: Sir. Its been nearly 1 hour. Hackett: I know. Lets give Shepard a bit more time Pvt: Its been a few hours now sir. There's not much left of the fleet. Hackett: Yes, I know. Shepard has come through before, he/she will again. Meanwhile Shepard, after passing out for a second time, died of blood loss about 2 hours ago.  |
|
inherit
1480
0
1,080
gothpunkboy89
2,311
September 2016
gothpunkboy89
|
Post by gothpunkboy89 on Feb 22, 2018 5:03:12 GMT
You can say your Shepard respects and likes the guy, but mine doesn't. Well by that logic I'm not a human. I'm just a hyper intelligent clown fish who is secretly planning to take over the world. I mean every picture and recorded instance of me shows I'm a human but reality doesn't matter I am a clown fish in and in 2 days I will release my plan to take over the world in the name of the clown fish king. Down with humans up with clown fish! Down with humans up with clown fish! Down with humans up with clown fish! And yet Shepard can hear Hackett talk to him/her, and before that, Shepard and Anderson were able to communicate with no problem until some interference cut them off. Your right. Which leads to the next logical step of the Catalyst being able to block communication signals. If it can create a Reaper it could master the basic capabilities to block communication signals to keep it self safe. Or simply the massive amount of energy the Crucible is releasing interferes with communication signals. You know Hackett says the same thing before the extended cut was released, right? Your right the addition was Hackett saying about someone making it to the beam and all ships to evacuate once the Crucible activates. Doesn't actually negate my point if it is making a clarification. I would have had Shepard make an attempt to contact Hackett after passing out. I mean time is not on Hackett's side. Wouldn't it be funny if Shepard passed out again before making a choice. What would Hackett do? Pvt: Sir. Its been nearly 1 hour. Hackett: I know. Lets give Shepard a bit more time Pvt: Its been a few hours now sir. There's not much left of the fleet. Hackett: Yes, I know. Shepard has come through before, he/she will again. Meanwhile Shepard, after passing out for a second time, died of blood loss about 2 hours ago.  Yes we all have different ways we would have preferred to have things happen. I would have preferred the game to end at the beam run. Not because what happens afterwards is bad but because the idea that you can struggle but somethings are inescapable would have made a better ending. Not many games have the fortitude to make a game were the bad guy wins after showing how utterly pointless all the loss and sacrifice of the good guys. Time isn't always obvious in how fast or slow it passes during in game events. It could have been just an hour since the attack started or 5 hours since the attack started that you reach the Citadel. Either way the Crucible is the only hope in the galaxy and they would hold their ground until the last man. Because that was the point. It is the same strategy that Aragon used in Tolkien's Return of the King. Lead the free people of Middle Earth in a last stand against the forces of Sauron to distract and keep their attention away from their own lands. Even though they are out numbered 5 to 1 at least. The entire point being a suicidal attack to keep the attention away from the trump card. They do not know if Frodo is alive and how far away he might be from Mt Doom. Regardless if Frodo made it in time to destroy Sauron and save them they would fight to the last man for the specific intent of buying Frodo time and distracting the Eye. Aragon and the Free people committed themselves to total victory at the cost of all their lives or total destruction at the cost of all their lives. Because retreat only meant Sauron was free to look around his own country and see Frodo and take the ring. Retreat meant Sauron would win and they would be without any hope of victory or living. The parallels are so obvious you could make a fair case of plagiarism simply substituting items. Instead of the One Ring you got Crucible. Instead of Sauron you got Reapers. Instead of Mount Doom you have Citadel. |
|
inherit
♨ Retired
24
0
26,308
themikefest
15,636
August 2016
themikefest
21,655
15,426
|
Post by themikefest on Feb 22, 2018 5:48:14 GMT
Yeah that's it. The thing blocked the comms, yet Hackett was able to get through before Shepard passed out.
|
|
invisibleman
N2
i'm just begging for change at the liqueur store... *face palm* no, not really.
Games: Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquisition, KOTOR, Baldur's Gate, Jade Empire, Mass Effect Andromeda
Origin: CasperTheLich
Posts: 108 Likes: 93
inherit
8428
0
Jun 17, 2018 10:23:04 GMT
93
invisibleman
i'm just begging for change at the liqueur store... *face palm* no, not really.
108
May 15, 2017 13:54:24 GMT
May 2017
invisibleman
Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquisition, KOTOR, Baldur's Gate, Jade Empire, Mass Effect Andromeda
CasperTheLich
|
Post by invisibleman on Feb 23, 2018 23:18:48 GMT
IMHO, objectively the entire plot for the ending of ME3 is garbage, and the extended cut patched a few bits, but the major flaws are still there. i just can't take anything seriously from, say... the beam-run to the final ending sequence and then those ending slides too. you need to be able to transition from part A, to B, and finally to C... and do so clearly, without contradicting yourself. not only did they completely fail here, they even managed to contradict the lore mass effect had managed to build upon up to this point & as well as the narrative of the entire series, even in the extended cut they failed to really fix anything. now, i think i've related my arguments a few dozen times in other places here and there (though not in this particular thread, unless i'm forgetting something), including the old forums... so i figure you're all sick of em. so i'll just stop here. Oh please do go on because every time I see someone post stuff like you I notice large gaps in the story. Facts omitted or reduced and context of events fundamentally altered or approached in an overly simple way. i can't tell if you're being sarcastic or not... well, it's been what 2 years since i've played through ME3, and longer still since i've done a pt with an unmodded ending. if you're serious i'll see if i can find a few of my old arguments... as my mind is likely full of holes about the original ending by this point, and i don't feel like suffering through the original or ec endings for the sake of arguing about it. ---edit i guess i should also note that... IMHO, the writing in most games is flawed, half-baked, generally lack luster... and most games have endings that are written just as poorly as mass effect 3's. and i don't hold that against mass effect 3, the main issues with me3's ending in my mind (and others) is that it's simply out of place... some might say that's a failure in and of itself, i have no opinion on that, personally. now, people went completely nuts over how bad the ending was, i was not one such person. i simply didn't like it all that much. my subjective opinion. |
|
brfritos
N3
Games: Mass Effect Trilogy, Mass Effect Andromeda
Posts: 304 Likes: 501
inherit
8385
0
Sept 5, 2019 19:20:19 GMT
501
brfritos
304
May 2017
brfritos
Mass Effect Trilogy, Mass Effect Andromeda
|
Post by brfritos on Feb 24, 2018 4:57:31 GMT
Yeah that's it. The thing blocked the comms, yet Hackett was able to get through before Shepard passed out. It's because of the device whatever thing, that's why. Copyright: "Thank You for Smoking" movie You don't know this and call yourself a fan? Preposterous!  On the topic... I wished the endings and consequences were more organic to Shepard's and other races actions. If you want to burn Earth and basically destroy the entire galaxy when the relays explode, you really have to work for it and not the other way around. It's the same thing with ME2, I saw countless people screwing the SM and think to myself: how the hell they achieved that?! The why I can speculate: you need only to listen Miranda before leaving the Normandy to board the Collector base and do as she say. But she's a beatch, so people take'd on the personal level and did exactly the opposite of it. LOL It's brilliant what Bioware did actually. I didn't exactly liked the endings with the exception of destroy. I really liked the original destroy ending, not joking. Until the EC of course, because it changes some "little" things that ruined that ending. The EC really pissed me off not because the whole bandwagon "we demand a change", but because Bioware and EA caved to the audience and diluted the endings. The endings of ME3, regardless if the player liked them, are ambitious and requeried multiple playthroughs and a little brainstorm to be fully connected. There are problems of course and big ones, nothing is perfect. There's a lot of handhelding, assumptions and things that are just in the air without fully explanation/exposition. Isn't right, Leviathan? I have the impression Leviathan being a DLC is a problem. If present in the game from the start I think players would accept the endings better, specially starchild. Again, is only a impression, I could be wrong. Other than that, the contradictions and just plain DENIAL of past-story events are a unfortunate thing of modern writing. I already acccept it and to be honest, I become pleasantly surprised when a modern story don't do that. New dev: Hey, I wish the relays could be exploded by a asteroid hit and wipe the cluster they are in. Old dev: But we said it before they can survive Supernova blasts. Main director: just ignore it and let's get on with it. Very old dev: but now we have a problem, if destroying the relays destroy a cluster, how can we destroy all the relays and imply the galaxy survived? Main director very upset: shut up and let's get on with it!Of course the intention of the original destroy ending is implying the galaxy did not survived |
|
inherit
1480
0
1,080
gothpunkboy89
2,311
September 2016
gothpunkboy89
|
Post by gothpunkboy89 on Feb 26, 2018 16:29:28 GMT
Oh please do go on because every time I see someone post stuff like you I notice large gaps in the story. Facts omitted or reduced and context of events fundamentally altered or approached in an overly simple way. i can't tell if you're being sarcastic or not... well, it's been what 2 years since i've played through ME3, and longer still since i've done a pt with an unmodded ending. if you're serious i'll see if i can find a few of my old arguments... as my mind is likely full of holes about the original ending by this point, and i don't feel like suffering through the original or ec endings for the sake of arguing about it. ---edit i guess i should also note that... IMHO, the writing in most games is flawed, half-baked, generally lack luster... and most games have endings that are written just as poorly as mass effect 3's. and i don't hold that against mass effect 3, the main issues with me3's ending in my mind (and others) is that it's simply out of place... some might say that's a failure in and of itself, i have no opinion on that, personally. now, people went completely nuts over how bad the ending was, i was not one such person. i simply didn't like it all that much. my subjective opinion. Reapers are set up across all 3 games as an unstoppable force of nature that has harvested untold number of races. How do you stop the tide or a planet's rotation? |
|
inherit
2044
0
Nov 10, 2016 16:47:07 GMT
10,275
AnDromedary
4,446
Nov 10, 2016 16:30:09 GMT
November 2016
andromedary
|
Post by AnDromedary on Feb 26, 2018 17:16:59 GMT
Okay so you think the destroy ending was poorly written. I prefer it to the others but we'll probably have to agree to disagree on that point. And what? When I'm talking about generalizations I'm talking about what you posted the previous page: "But I'd say 90-99% of people who say they prefer destroy ending and would like the game to be destroy only aren't talking about that. What they want is Shepard giving the Finger to Catalyst before riding off on his magical space unicorn as the Crucible fires. Causing all the Reapers to just disappear all the people they killed appear alive again just in time for everyone to have a bitching week long party were the entire galaxy gets drunk and has tons of sex and all problems are now gone for every and ever." If I misunderstood this feel free to clarify what you meant. It could be so good if they didn't pull all the teeth out from it. I actually agree with this. I think the destroy ending (after the EC) lets the galaxy off way too easy, to the point, where it gets downright non-sensical. I would argue though, that this goes for all three endings. In Synthesis: Where are the Luddites and anti-technologists who get really freaked out by being violated by this? Where are pictures of the people trying to scratch their own green eyes out? (Keep in mind, the green wave didn't just change high tech races but everyone.). Or is everyone's mind somehow altered as well, so that free will is no longer a thing? If so, where is a mention of that? If there is any ending that (space)magically transforms the galaxy into a green fairy-tale wonderland where everyone rides unicorns all of a sudden, it's this one. Or Control: Whatever happened to the age old axiom: Absolute power corrupts absolutely? Ok, I'll have to give it to the control ending, at least there is a renegade Shepard version, where Shep does seem to govern the galaxy with a very firm hand. But still, the slides imply that all of this goes fairly smooth and is ultimately for the good of everyone. Where are the picture's of rebellious free-willed people, savagely stomped on by God-Shepard's Reapers? Where are new reaper's, the inevitable reinforcements, the Shep-AI is going to need when keeping control over an entire galaxy long term coming from? Is there harvesting going on under Shepard to keep their numbers constant? There are logical downsides ignored, swept under the rug or downright retconned in each of the EC endings. Inf act, this is my biggest gripe with the EC. While I do give BW credit for the effort and money they spent on the ending after release, I do not think, the EC upholds the implications of the original endings at all. So much for their catch phrase of "artistic integrity". That's why I am not opposed to ending mods at all because in a way, BW provided the first alternative endings themselves, so why not make a couple more versions for everyone's tastes. |
|
inherit
♨ Retired
24
0
26,308
themikefest
15,636
August 2016
themikefest
21,655
15,426
|
Post by themikefest on Feb 26, 2018 17:57:36 GMT
It's the same thing with ME2, I saw countless people screwing the SM and think to myself: how the hell they achieved that?! Its not as hard as some would believe. Destroy itself I didn't mind. It was good to see the reapers fall over destroyed The one thing, and I've mentioned this many times, is that the extended cut fixed the flashbacks as Shepard chooses whatever ending. A few of the things added made me laugh. The what-the-crap evac scene, the thing saying 'you don't know them, and there's not enough time to explain' and 'the green is the final evolution of all life'. My biggest issue with Leviathan is Shepard not asking if it knows anything about the catalyst. If it was part of the main game, would it make things better? Possible. |
|
invisibleman
N2
i'm just begging for change at the liqueur store... *face palm* no, not really.
Games: Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquisition, KOTOR, Baldur's Gate, Jade Empire, Mass Effect Andromeda
Origin: CasperTheLich
Posts: 108 Likes: 93
inherit
8428
0
Jun 17, 2018 10:23:04 GMT
93
invisibleman
i'm just begging for change at the liqueur store... *face palm* no, not really.
108
May 15, 2017 13:54:24 GMT
May 2017
invisibleman
Mass Effect Trilogy, Dragon Age: Origins, Dragon Age 2, Dragon Age Inquisition, KOTOR, Baldur's Gate, Jade Empire, Mass Effect Andromeda
CasperTheLich
|
Post by invisibleman on Feb 27, 2018 8:04:30 GMT
in regards to the control ending, everyone seems to think shepard Him/her-self is controlling the reapers... that's not what starkid actually says, iirc. it states that a new operating system will be created using shepard's personality as a base. that's nowhere near saying that overlord-godking shepard is controlling them directly, though i admit that the ending slides do seem to support the theory that shepard in some form is in control here, then again... not all things are as they appear to be -- and in reality, very few things actually are. Reapers are set up across all 3 games as an unstoppable force of nature that has harvested untold number of races. How do you stop the tide or a planet's rotation? now, if i was writing the ending to me3... the crucible would be an electronic warfare system. basically, it would normally function in a similar fashion to a wifi hotspot... except when attached to the catalyst (aka the citadel), it seizes control of the reaper's mass relay network, and converts it into a galaxy wide transmitter (or rather a relay dish the size of the entire galaxy), then it hijacks the reaper control/command signal and pours all the energy of the mass relays into it. now, for the reaper control signal to function properly (i theorize), the nanites would likely need a receiver of some kind, or at least some of them would, or they'ed need some way to fashion a signal receiver and likely attach it to the nervous system and or brain of their host. now, if i remember correctly... when a signal receiver gets hit by a broadcast that is significantly more powerful then those it's designed to receive... it tends to overload, and explode. so, galaxy wide each reaper (especially capital ships) have millions or perhaps billions of tiny nanites floating about their cellular structures and they basically become micro explosives. so imagine what that would do to a husk, brute, marauder, or even a reaper capital-ship. i actually came up with that a while ago, and it only took me about 5 minutes work out. now, i could continue with that. and expand into other what ifs, like what if those nanites don't hook into the capitalships "brain", or "nervious system", does that still do enough damage to kill it? etc. now, i admit... i have no actual knowledge about how that technology actually works, transmissions vs. relay-dishes vs. receivers is all greek to me, more or less. though, from my limited knowledge of such systems from the various tidbits i've collect over the years, i've honestly got no clue as to how well that whole scenario would actually workout. ---edit keep in mind i'm barely awake at this point, so sorry if that's a bit hard to follow. |
|
brfritos
N3
Games: Mass Effect Trilogy, Mass Effect Andromeda
Posts: 304 Likes: 501
inherit
8385
0
Sept 5, 2019 19:20:19 GMT
501
brfritos
304
May 2017
brfritos
Mass Effect Trilogy, Mass Effect Andromeda
|
Post by brfritos on Feb 27, 2018 23:01:13 GMT
It's the same thing with ME2, I saw countless people screwing the SM and think to myself: how the hell they achieved that?! Its not as hard as some would believe. Men, for screwing the SM I really had to work for it. The legendary Ecael made the guides for chosing how to make specific squadmates surviving because of this, I've found stupidly easy the Collector base mission. Ah, but this is the modern story telling in full speed. If you really think about it the Catalyst creates some inconsistency with the ending of ME1 .  My biggest issue with Leviathan actually is Shepard don't being allowed the choice to side or not with Leviathan. You know, calling the Reaper above and saying "hey big guy, dinner is served". I can give a blank card to Bioware and make a little suspension of disbelief regarding Shepard siding with Cerberus at the start of ME2, otherwise we wouldn't have a game. But Leviathan? And a DLC for that matter? I can choose if krogans, quarians and geth - all of them togheter if I wish - bite the dust but not a dying race composed of only a few individuals? Not cool.  |
|
