[QUOTE=JeanLuc761;35360366]That assumes that stopping the Reapers is all there is to winning.
[sp]
Destroy: Commit genocide and betray an ally
Control: Sacrifice your principles and follow the Illusive Man's path. Subjugate an entire race.
Synthesis: Become Saren and remove all diversity from galactic life, which is specifically what we were trying to prevent.[/sp][/QUOTE]
i think the point of the game is that you cannot win over the reapers/ the reapers are doing the right thing (would have been better to have more buildup that the reapers are right) (something like what javik says, everything was going well, we thought we might even defeat them (like he says we represses ais and stopped them from getting more inteligent than us, then the reapers arrived and we found out that they had surpassed us long ago))
[QUOTE=LasGunz;35360314]TEN HOURS of ambient sounds in the Normandy SR-2's drive core.
Really relaxing.[/QUOTE]
Not for Tali :rolleye:
[QUOTE=JeanLuc761;35360366]That assumes that stopping the Reapers is all there is to winning.
[sp]
Destroy: Commit genocide and betray an ally
Control: Sacrifice your principles and follow the Illusive Man's path. Subjugate an entire race.
Synthesis: Become Saren and remove all diversity from galactic life, which is specifically what we were trying to prevent.[/sp][/QUOTE]
What ally do you betray?
If you select the Destroy ending, EDI shows up at the end is fine. Someone pointed that out to Bioware and they just handwaved it by saying the Starkid was untrustworthy and that it doesn't actually destroy all synthetic life. So, which ally do you betray?
[QUOTE=Eltro102;35360407]i think the point of the game is that you cannot win over the reapers/ the reapers are doing the right thing (would have been better to have more buildup that the reapers are right) (something like what javik says, everything was going well, we thought we might even defeat them (like he says we represses ais and stopped them from getting more inteligent than us, then the reapers arrived and we found out that they had surpassed us long ago))[/QUOTE]
And when I actually played the game I noticed there's no reason to think the Illusive Man is wrong either yo. Shepard kinda seems like some of the people on this forum, when the Illusive Man tries to explain why controlling the Reapers is good he just closes his ears and goes "no you're wrong and evil!" LMAO. Like when the Illusive Man points out that EDI taking the robot body for the greater good is the same thing he's trying to do but obviously on a smaller scale.
[QUOTE=Eltro102;35360407]i think the point of the game is that you cannot win over the reapers/ the reapers are doing the right thing (would have been better to have more buildup that the reapers are right) (something like what javik says, everything was going well, we thought we might even defeat them (like he says we represses ais and stopped them from getting more inteligent than us, then the reapers arrived and we found out that they had surpassed us long ago))[/QUOTE]
Except The Reapers aren't right, especially if you ally the Geth and the Quarians. In fact, that topples their entire argument completely.
[QUOTE=RunawayLove;35360368]I'd say Shepard getting indoctrinated is the Reapers winning yo.[/QUOTE]
Mind, the indoctrination theory is all wild speculation, not actual fact. While there may be evidence that may or not point at indoctrination, we need to make sure that what's considered the evidence is actual evidence or just a result of something else entirely.
That's true, although it was kind of linear; the quarian/geth conflict happened after the turian-krogan part of the campaign, as opposed to having them being accessible at any time after leaving the Citadel. Thing is, if BioWare spent more time on development (sounds unthinkable, but if EA threw more money at them they might've had a few more months on the development cycle), maybe it would've been possible to engage in the different primary missions in the order of the player's choosing.
Might've had more time to say "Casey, I REALLY suggest you rethink these Colour-Coded Shaboozey endings", too.
[QUOTE=RunawayLove;35360432]And when I actually played the game I noticed there's no reason to think the Illusive Man is wrong either yo. Shepard kinda seems like some of the people on this forum, when the Illusive Man tries to explain why controlling the Reapers is good he just closes his ears and goes "no you're wrong and evil!" LMAO. Like when the Illusive Man points out that EDI taking the robot body for the greater good is the same thing he's trying to do but obviously on a smaller scale.[/QUOTE]
The thing is, [sp]The Illusive Man ultimately attempts something that fails spectacularly - it's been shown time and time again that trying to control the Reapers results in failure because it's almost impossible, pretty much anyone who tried ends up dead or indoctrinated. He's wrong because it's a massive leap of judgement that the big nasty aliens aren't going to be easily controlled like puppets.[/sp]
[QUOTE=ironman17;35360469]That's true, although it was kind of linear; the quarian/geth conflict happened after the turian-krogan part of the campaign, as opposed to having them being accessible at any time after leaving the Citadel. Thing is, if BioWare spent more time on development (sounds unthinkable, but if EA threw more money at them they might've had a few more months on the development cycle), maybe it would've been possible to engage in the different primary missions in the order of the player's choosing.
Might've had more time to say "Casey, I REALLY suggest you rethink these Colour-Coded Shaboozey endings", too.[/QUOTE]
In my opinion they had plenty of time to make a decent game. Saying that the game was rushed really doesn't justify a lot of the downright dumb choices they mad with the game. Also you don't need more than thirty seconds to say "Casey, the ending you wrote is dumb."
[QUOTE=Grim Joker;35360431]What ally do you betray?
If you select the Destroy ending, EDI shows up at the end is fine. Someone pointed that out to Bioware and they just handwaved it by saying the Starkid was untrustworthy and that it doesn't actually destroy all synthetic life. So, which ally do you betray?[/QUOTE]
[sp]EDI didn't show up at the end when I did destroy...[/sp]
[QUOTE=mac338;35359712]Dang. Well, guess once I have a level 20 Asari adept there's really not a whole lot to look forward to unlocking. Well, what are the best weapons anyway?[/QUOTE]
Talon
[QUOTE=Grim Joker;35360431]What ally do you betray?
If you select the Destroy ending, EDI shows up at the end is fine. Someone pointed that out to Bioware and they just handwaved it by saying the Starkid was untrustworthy and that it doesn't actually destroy all synthetic life. So, which ally do you betray?[/QUOTE]
EDI popping up at the end regardless is probably just another plothole, seeing as how the squadmates who were with you [sp]on the mad dash before the conclusion[/sp] also have a chance of popping up at the end regardless, even though they with you.
[QUOTE=Blooper Reel;35360481]The thing is, [sp]The Illusive Man ultimately attempts something that fails spectacularly - it's been shown time and time again that trying to control the Reapers results in failure because it's almost impossible, pretty much anyone who tried ends up dead or indoctrinated. He's wrong because it's a massive leap of judgement that the big nasty aliens aren't going to be easily controlled like puppets.[/sp][/QUOTE]
And it's also a massive leap in judgement for Shepard to try and destroy them cause it's been proven that that's impossible too.
Portal 2 had one of the most satisfying endings ever. Although a completely different genre, narrative and conclusion, I think Bioware should take notes from them.
[QUOTE=FreakySoup;35360525][sp]EDI didn't show up at the end when I did destroy...[/sp][/QUOTE]
She did for me. Walked right out of the ship with the rest of them after they crashed.
Also I really don't think spoiler tags are needed. The vast majority of the thread is spent discussing the ending, so if someone came in and they weren't spoiled, they've been spoiled by now.
[editline]30th March 2012[/editline]
[QUOTE=RunawayLove;35360534]And it's also a massive leap in judgement for Shepard to try and destroy them cause it's been proven that that's impossible too.[/QUOTE]
Yeah, except for the parts in 1 and 3 when you destroy Reapers. But I mean besides the fact that it's totally possible to destroy them, it's totally impossible to destroy them.
[QUOTE=Zezibesh;35360528]Talon[/QUOTE]
Noted. What about assault rifles?
[QUOTE=RunawayLove;35360534]And it's also a massive leap in judgement for Shepard to try and destroy them cause it's been proven that that's impossible too.[/QUOTE]
There's still the matter of fact that, again, it's made out before the ending for all 3 games that you have a [I]chance[/I] at destroying them, that's pretty much what everyone expected, atleast as a possible ending.
And it's not the Reapers at the end that Shep destroys in the destroy ending, it's [I]all synthetic life[/I], which would basically be the same as wiping out a bunch of dangerous terrorists from another country by killing everyone from that country.
My logic behind the "more time to disapprove of that kinda ending" thing boiled down to how I thought that Casey already heard those qualms during pre-production and was all "well that's just, like, your opinion, man" and there wasn't enough time for the others to put the pressure on and convince him to have Shepard fight Harbinger, in some sort of super-amazing final bossfight by possessing a Reaper or using the Crucible to turn the Citadel into a badass battleship.
Also, apart from the endings, the DLC debacle and the linear main quest progression, what other dumb decisions were made? Those first three are the ones that came to mind, but I can't really see any others at the moment...
[url]http://www.escapistmagazine.com/videos/view/escapist-podcast/5543-Bonus-Mass-Effect-3-With-Spoilers-Part-3[/url]
Anyone listened to it?
I find them boring so not going to. If you have what did they say? Same shit?
[QUOTE=Greeneyes;35360607][url]http://www.escapistmagazine.com/videos/view/escapist-podcast/5543-Bonus-Mass-Effect-3-With-Spoilers-Part-3[/url]
Anyone listened to it?
I find them boring so not going to. If you have what did they say? Same shit?[/QUOTE]
It's pretty much just what we've been saying in this thread and calling out people who are going "You're all just haters, games is art, hubbuh blah blah."
[QUOTE=Blooper Reel;35360589]There's still the matter of fact that, again, it's made out before the ending for all 3 games that you have a [I]chance[/I] at destroying them, that's pretty much what everyone expected, atleast as a possible ending.
And it's not the Reapers at the end that Shep destroys in the destroy ending, it's [I]all synthetic life[/I], which would basically be the same as wiping out a bunch of dangerous terrorists from another country by killing everyone from that country.[/QUOTE]
You don't kill all synthetics in the destroy ending, Bioware even confirmed it.
[QUOTE=ironman17;35360603]My logic behind the "more time to disapprove of that kinda ending" thing boiled down to how I thought that Casey already heard those qualms during pre-production and was all "well that's just, like, your opinion, man" and there wasn't enough time for the others to put the pressure on and convince him to have Shepard fight Harbinger, in some sort of super-amazing final bossfight by possessing a Reaper or using the Crucible to turn the Citadel into a badass battleship.
Also, apart from the endings, the DLC debacle and the linear main quest progression, what other dumb decisions were made? Those first three are the ones that came to mind, but I can't really see any others at the moment...[/QUOTE]
Removing some additional dialogue between Anderson and Shepard where Anderson treats Shepard like a good friend instead of a soldier because it "drew things out too long", maybe?
Or removing an investigate option for the Catalyst because "players didn't need to know that kind of thing?"
[QUOTE=RunawayLove;35360534]And it's also a massive leap in judgement for Shepard to try and destroy them cause it's been proven that that's impossible too.[/QUOTE]
[url=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gtBbwtY6ROo&t=4m7s]Look at that invincibility![/url]
[QUOTE=Grim Joker;35360632]You don't kill all synthetics in the destroy ending, Bioware even confirmed it.[/QUOTE]
I don't ever recall them saying that.
Source?
[QUOTE=Blooper Reel;35360589]There's still the matter of fact that, again, it's made out before the ending for all 3 games that you have a [I]chance[/I] at destroying them, that's pretty much what everyone expected, atleast as a possible ending.
And it's not the Reapers at the end that Shep destroys in the destroy ending, it's [I]all synthetic life[/I], which would basically be the same as wiping out a bunch of dangerous terrorists from another country by killing everyone from that country.[/QUOTE]
Yeah so from what I gather destroying the reapers (and I mean all of them not just one or two) is impossible without the crucible, but in the end if he wants to destroy them for real he has to destroy all synthetic life. So I'm just wondering how that's worse than controlling them yo. And I'm pretty sure controlling them is also fully possible with the crucible cause that's one of the endings right. I'm not an expert on the mechanics of the game world this is just what I gather from my playthrough and shit.
[QUOTE=Blooper Reel;35360649]I don't ever recall them saying that.
Source?[/QUOTE]
Their twitter. I don't really want to go back and find the tweet, but the jist of it was that someone pointed out that EDI showed up and left the ship with Joker in their Destroy ending (she did in mine, too) and they basically handwaved it by saying the Starkid was lying during some bits of what he said.
[QUOTE=Grim Joker;35360662]Their twitter. I don't really want to go back and find the tweet, but the jist of it was that someone pointed out that EDI showed up and left the ship with Joker in their Destroy ending (she did in mine, too) and they basically handwaved it by saying the Starkid was lying during some bits of what he said.[/QUOTE]
LMAO now the boy is acknowledging Bioware's twitter. They also said on their Twitter many times that there's more to the ending than what's on the surface... But nah b fuck that shit lol.
[QUOTE=JeanLuc761;35360305]Quite frankly, they owe us the ending that they advertised and we paid for. Nobody is -forcing- Bioware to change the ending, but a whole lot of people are certainly asking.[/QUOTE]
This is the logic that the video was making fun of. You look like a self-entitled jackass when you think that developers owe you something. They made the game that they wanted to make, if you like it, great. If you didn't, that's okay too. But you don't need to spend all day, every day complaining about it.
[QUOTE=Grim Joker;35360662]Their twitter. I don't really want to go back and find the tweet, but the jist of it was that someone pointed out that EDI showed up and left the ship with Joker in their Destroy ending (she did in mine, too) and they basically handwaved it by saying the Starkid was lying during some bits of what he said.[/QUOTE]
Seems a bit... odd. You'd kind of think that'd be alluded ingame.
[QUOTE=RunawayLove;35360696]LMAO now the boy is acknowledging Bioware's twitter. They also said on their Twitter many times that there's more to the ending than what's on the surface... But nah b fuck that shit lol.[/QUOTE]
When did I ignore that? I said that the Indoctrination Theory isn't canon. Holy shit, stop posting.
[editline]30th March 2012[/editline]
[QUOTE=Blooper Reel;35360720]Seems a bit... odd. You'd kind of think that'd be alluded ingame.[/QUOTE]
Are you just now catching on that Bioware has a bunch of plotholes that they didn't think to fill in-game?
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.
