Extensive Analysis by Noah Gervais

What I'm gathering from this post is that you are critiquing an argument made in the video without watching it yourself, which is never a great strategy. You are presenting the argumeent that the idea of the Kett as an enemy race has great potential. This does not speak to their actual execution and implementation within this game. In MEA, they are presented pretty blandly, and that's pretty lame.

In the video he actually makes note of the possibility that many of the issues he brings up (like with the Kett) could be helped by fleshing things outt with DLC, but also expresses his frustration at this becoming a pattern with Bioware titles: releasing a very flawed title only to show that they can fix many of these problems in the DLC (as was the case with ME3 and DAI).

Again, actually take the time to view the analysis before offering critique of it based solely on cursory comments on this thread. If you have no intention of actually watching the critique yourself, I might suggest not trying to argue the validity of its points, as it would save people a lot of frustration in trying to reexplain arguments readily available in the video.

What previous statement? the only post on this thread which I have made was one where I thanked the op, followed by that response to you. I made one statement, which made a fairly coherent argument: that the possibilities presented by the general idea of the Kett does not excuse their limp implementation in MEA itself.

Secondly, you are critiquing a paraphrasing of a segment of a video that is over an hour long and treating it as though you've made an effective and well-informed critique of that point. The problem is that the main way to explain why your concerns are unfounded would just be to say "Watch the video, that does a better job of explaining its own points." to which your response is "No." which in turn kind of kills the discourse, unless someone is willing to go in and transcribe vast swaths of the video for your benefit.

Like I said earlier, critiquing points made in a video that you have not watched and have no intention of watching is a bit silly. You are saying that you are just critiquing the argument expressed here, but that argument is just a paraphrasing of a point made in the video which is the main subject of this thread.

"but the one part that does it best was when he was talking about how the enemy stealing genetic material and turning us into them has already been used in every ME game so far, and ended with" That is not a good argument. It is, in fact, not even the bare bones of what could, upon elaboration, be a good argument. If he is critiquing the implementation, that is, in fact, a seperate argument, one I am willing to listen to. 

I am critiquing what was posted here, and make no claims to be critiquing the video (if I have to spell it out further maybe a series of diagrams are in order). I merely stated that if what I am reading here is representative of the video, it is a bad video. If you are missrepresenting Mr Gervais' work, then my apologies are in order to him. I am assuming that you do not undertand what the meaning of "paraphrase" is, as there is no way that the argument you represent in paraphrase can be credible, since the paraphrase itself is nonsense. I am not refusing to watch the video out of obstinacy, because I would not watch a video like it under any circumstances (just personal taste and interest). If you wish to act as a stenographer for me then by all means proceed, but as I find that unlikely, you will just have to take my word that my above critique is of your words, not his (as well as the same argument I have seen elsewhere). 

 I'd like to ask if you could provide your own defentition of "paraphrase". I think what you do not understand is that the paraphrase you contructed is false, factually false, therefor it is either not a paraphrase, and in fact a missrepresentation of the video's argument, or it is accurate, and the video's argument is nonsense. I can hear you telling me now I can't say that it is nonsense without watching the video, but if an argument is false in it's premise, nothing else about it can be correct (you can't tell me I need to listen to an argument that's premise is "the moon is made out of green cheese" since it's premise, on the face of it, is untrue). I do not come off as ill-informed, since I have, despite your obstinant unwillingness to listen to me, never claimed to be arguing with the video, but with, for lack of a better word, you. I think it is about time we end this discussion, unless you attend a remedial course in basic logic, as, despite the numerous life preservers I have thrown you, you seem willfully to desire to drown. Nothing you have been saying makes any sense, and it sounds like your are using words outside your grasp.

I thought this was a forum where all opinions mattered. Seems more and more people who are not interested in discussing anything let alone review the material provided are putting their foot down and feel attacked if you give well thought out reasons to give it a try.

If it is not their way it's the highway. I suppose it doesn't cross their little minds forums may become obsolete in a toxic environment like that.

Simply thanks for this.

It sold less at retail than both 2 & 3...

If this response is in reference to me, I would like state that I have no obligation to watch a video, regardless of the topic. It would be poor form for me to argue the merits of the video without watching it, so I have not. My above debate (if it can even be called that, "beating my head against a brick wall" sounds more apt) was about the words of one of the posters here, and I only said that if the poster's words represented the video, the video has a bad argument. I have not, nor will I ever, talk about the content of the video without watching it (and I think I have shown myself to be very willing to hear any of it's arguments conveyed in another medium).

I survived ten minutes of rambling. When he failed to piece together the Kadara story I gave up.

Every post you make is hypocrisy at its finest. Thank you for the entertainment. 

Indeed. And people wonder how the old BSN got to be as toxic as it was.

A well thought out critique, thanks for posting

People do not want conversations. People want to launch into tirades of verbal diarrhea and for others to agree with them and tell them just how right they are...that their opinion is amazing, they are amazing, and they are important. They want to be recognized as intelligent without actually having to put in the work or don't bother to even define what makes a person intelligent or a conversation intelligent....or put that trait above others like compassion, humility, a sense of humor, open mindedness...

People don't think anymore. They react. 

And what's worse is that they can do it now and have hundreds of strangers see it, agree with it, like it, share it...and feed the insatiable inner monster in all of us that is our deeply rooted narcissism. We don't even have to know the name of who we are talking to anymore, we don't have to look them in the eye, we don't even have to feign the appearance of paying attention and not look like we're just waiting for the other person to stop talking so they can finally say what they've been preparing to say. 

We also have gotten into a bad habit of associating any and all opinions to be a testament of a person's entire identity. They said they liked this thing, but that's impossible because I do not...and that means one of us is wrong...but if I am wrong about this that means I'm at fault...If I am at fault that means I'm not as awesome as all these people liking and sharing my opinion made me think I am. I cannot allow that possibility; therefore, I have determined the other person is the faulty one, they are deficient, they have to have some agenda, they have to be dumber than me, they are an enemy to my sense of being and I must destroy them or else I might begin to doubt myself.

People cannot stand the doubt. It creeps into our minds and poisons us. Doubt forces you to think and explore options that are unpleasant and we've grown so accustomed to distancing ourselves from anything that gives negative feelings. 

People need to stop running away from doubt. They need to embrace that little voice in their heads that says "hey maybe I am wrong?" as soon as you accept that sometimes you are just going to be wrong or that there isn't a clear right or wrong answer - you start to feel better about yourself. You don't get so wrapped up in this mentality that you constantly have to fight for every opinion, statement, and belief you have because it will somehow assert your dominance in the least meaningful and most pathetic way possible (in an online forum for video games) 

A lot of the time I just shit post on here for the mediocre lols, and occasionally try to put out a post or two that had at least some thought put into it. If it's something subjective I realize a lot of people will not agree with it and that's okay. It's okay that I want to romance Peebee and it's okay that you think she's Shrek in raccoon make-up. I don't feel like it's impossible for those two opinions to exist in this world or that it somehow someway HAS to be a statement about me as a person. It really doesn't matter and it's not worth getting worked up over.

If it's something objective like how something works in the lore, a character did or didn't say something...if I'm wrong about that I need to try to own up to that and admit I made a mistake rather than go into denial or start delving into alternative facts. 

I have to stop typing because I'm starting to get all self-righteous and sounding like one of those long winded assholes that I seem to dislike so much. Ultimately this post is just a tiny one in a sea of bullshit opinions in favor of or against calling this a good game. After a certain point you just have to stop the bullshit, go outside, do something else, and get the fuck over other people and yourself.

End of unsolicited rant.