Forums › Halo 4 Forum › Halo 4 Xbox 360 Forum › H3BC...A whole new world

H3BC...A whole new world

Page:

This topic is now read-only on GameSpot.
To post new messages, please visit GameFAQs and log in using the same email and password that you use on GameSpot.

_Sawyer

Mar 13, 2012 9:41 am GMT
*MASS EFFECT 3 SPOILERS*

From: devil mingy
However, Bioware failed to give it the importance it deserved. The Reaper's motivation is the pivotal piece of information from that scene and is supposed to be the thing that most influences Shepard's final choice. If the game wanted me to believe that Synthetics could be hostile, they should show more of that and tell me less. They had 25 hours of game time to foreshadow it in ME3 alone, and they spent all of the time proving the Catalyst wrong.

True enough, the importance of their motivation wasn't properly conveyed. I was just trying to get across the point that it was explained even if not made clear enough.

But how exactly does it happen? Does the Crucible wave of green space magic just latch Shepard DNA (does being rebuilt with cybernetics even affect DNA?) to everything? Like I said, I don't mind them making **** up. However, seeing them write stuff like this:

http://masseffect.wikia.com/wiki/Element_zero
http://masseffect.wikia.com/wiki/FTL
http://masseffect.wikia.com/wiki/Biotic

and then end with nothing was jarring. It made the Crucible and Catalyst feel less like important elements of the universe and more like cheap plot devices.

It may not be something life can understand. It's presumably the Catalyst's device and they made it seem like he's been around since the beginning of time. The sad truth is that not everything has a comprehensible explanation and he'd probably say the same thing as the Reapers did: It's not something you can possibly comprehend. Sometimes an answer can only lead to more questions in an infinite cycle.

The inability of the game to explain itself is a problem. I didn't like Halo 3 when it made me read Evolutions to understand the Cortana moments and I will not excuse Bioware for it either, particularly since their writing is held at a better standard and this could've easily been solved if they had an Investigate option added to the final conversation.

Also, if Deception is any indication of the future quality of the series' expanded universe, I will not be seeking explanations from it.

You don't need to know the detail of the Catalyst's existence to understand the story or the ending. The expanded universe provides background and content to expand on what you already know. In ME1, we knew Sovereign got a hold of Saren and indoctrinated him, but the games didn't tells us how they first came into contact or why Saren was chosen because it's not a necessary detail in understanding the plot. That information was included in the prologue book. Same goes for here. You understand the purpose of the Catalyst and his role in things, but anything more isn't necessary to understand how things played out.

Deception is being fixed and republished, so no worries here.

A reasonable explanation, but a terrible excuse. Bioware shouldn't have sacrificed quality on that scene just to have a meaningful name in their credits.

It was a 30 second scene. Doesn't matter IMO.
---
Teh Real Dejkha
"I don't know why everyone is on your side but when I see and ass i point them out. And you friend, is a big ass" - Rizz02125 to me
_Sawyer

Mar 13, 2012 9:47 am GMT
From: devil mingy
Reading through my post again (as well as some in a couple other forums), I feel the need to clarify something again. If anything I post comes off as hostile, please note that it is not my intention. As I said, I believe you and I are above the common debate perception that if we have a disagreement, it means that one of us must be wrong. I fully respect your opinion and the opinion of anyone that likes the endings as they are. If you are satisfied with the whole package, good for you. I mean that truthfully. I merely wish to clarify my opinion on why I was not satisfied with what I saw and why I no longer feel invested in the Mass Effect universe. _Sawyer's post is not the first one I have seen that believes my dislike comes from a lack of understanding. I just want to get the point across that I do understand what happened and that my issues stem from other elements.

I know. I'm just trying to provide clarification for the reasons how things played out in the end in the areas that you didn't approve of. That's not to say I don't have the same concerns as you. If they expanded on the Catalyst and workings of the Crucible as a whole within the game, that would be great, but I just felt they told enough for me the understand the plot and anything else in the expanded universe is a bonus.
---
Teh Real Dejkha
"I don't know why everyone is on your side but when I see and ass i point them out. And you friend, is a big ass" - Rizz02125 to me
devil_mingy

Mar 13, 2012 10:26 am GMT
*ME3 SPOILERS*

You don't need to know the detail of the Catalyst's existence to understand the story or the ending. The expanded universe provides background and content to expand on what you already know. In ME1, we knew Sovereign got a hold of Saren and indoctrinated him, but the games didn't tells us how they first came into contact or why Saren was chosen because it's not a necessary detail in understanding the plot. That information was included in the prologue book. Same goes for here. You understand the purpose of the Catalyst and his role in things, but anything more isn't necessary to understand how things played out.

I disagree. Saren's first contact with Sovereign is nice fluff, but it doesn't change his role in the first Mass Effect if I don't read Revelation. However, the problem (and source of those questions I listed) is that I do not understand the Catalyst's purpose and role. I can infer that he controls the Reapers and started the cycle, but that leads to problems when thinking about the extent in which he controls the Reapers and the cycle.

It also makes me ask exactly what Harbinger was. Mass Effect 2 and Mass Effect 3's own codex built him up as some powerful Reaper leader. However, his only role in Mass Effect 3 could've been accomplished by any Reaper, and how he relates to the Catalyst is pure speculation. It's a major plot thread that goes nowhere.

*Gears of War 3 spoilers*

It reminds me of the nature of the Locust Queen in Gears of War. We know she's human and she's been leading the Horde even before the war started. However, the nature of who exactly she is goes unanswered despite the fact that the game itself asks the question several times. On the bottom line, is it a vitally important fact? Arguably, no, the answer will not change the events that play out. However, trying to piece together an explanation with the given information leads to even more questions that leave the narrative feeling inconsistent at best and illogical at worst.

*Uncharted 3 spoilers*

So I don't seem too much like a 360 fanboy, I'll add another example. The character of Talbot is shown throughout the game to be impervious to bullets, capable of disappearing into thin air, and even having subtle mind control abilities. By the time the game ends, he is killed in a fairly drawn out knife on fist fight and I know nothing more about him than I did previously. Now, is it possible these were all tricks? Or is it really farfetched he was a mystical element in a series that welcomes it? Sure, both are plausible and I'd be fine either way. However, the lack of explanation is the worst possible way to solve it. It betrays the idea of good storytelling when a plot point is brought up and then the nature and implications of it ignored completely (and don't even get me started on the spiders).

Deception is being fixed and republished, so no worries here.

A good point, but I'll file that under "wait and see". Fall of Reach got a fix and republication and that only made things worse. Deception is in even more horrible shape; it's not even consistent with itself.

I just felt they told enough for me the understand the plot and anything else in the expanded universe is a bonus.

Fair enough.

Although, bioware's internal forum staff implying that the last 10 minutes are a dream isn't helping matters:

http://social.bioware.com/forum/1/topic/355/index/9872108&lf=8

Boy, if you think the backlash is bad with the endings now, imagine if Bioware shipped the game without a real ending at all.
_Sawyer

Mar 13, 2012 11:01 am GMT
From: devil mingy
I disagree. Saren's first contact with Sovereign is nice fluff, but it doesn't change his role in the first Mass Effect if I don't read Revelation. However, the problem (and source of those questions I listed) is that I do not understand the Catalyst's purpose and role. I can infer that he controls the Reapers and started the cycle, but that leads to problems when thinking about the extent in which he controls the Reapers and the cycle.

Though it's true it leads to problems when thinking about the extent of his power, the extent of his power isn't necessary knowledge to the actual overall plot (basically: your mission to stop the Reapers). It may not give insight into Harbingers purpose, but your don't need to know that to understand the big picture. Would I have preferred them to give us this insight? Of course, but sometimes you have to choose between smart storytelling and forced storytelling. Smart storytelling shows the audiences everything the need to know to understand the main plot while keeping it flowing smoothly in a manner that makes sense, whereas forced storytelling tells the audience what they want to know no matter how out of place it may seem, thus making it a bumpier ride. There are different tradeoffs, but it seems Bioware choose the former method. But I understand that it mostly comes down to opinion in that you believe they should have taken a different approach.

Fair enough.

Although, bioware's internal forum staff implying that the last 10 minutes are a dream isn't helping matters:

http://social.bioware.com/forum/1/topic/355/index/9872108&lf=8

I don't consider theories like that until Bioware confirms it. IMO it's just people trying to find a reason for an ending they didn't approve of.

Not to mention how that theory claims there's a "real ending" which is impossible in a series where there are no canon decisions.
---
Teh Real Dejkha
"I don't know why everyone is on your side but when I see and ass i point them out. And you friend, is a big ass" - Rizz02125 to me
devil_mingy

Mar 13, 2012 11:39 am GMT
*ME 3 Spoilers*

I, too, understand that plot points should not be piled up. However, I also believe that this information could have been given without being forced. As it is now, the lack of information (and the obtuse way they conveyed what there is) isn't what I consider smart.

What am I to make of the Catalyst? As a narrative device, I know what he is: he is a way to explain the threat in human terms and convey a quick amount of information required for the final choice (Basically, the Architect from Matrix Reloaded).

However, while it does a good job of explaining the big picture looking forward, it doesn't explain anything on what we've played previously.

If he is this omnipotent will of the Reapers that controls and knows all they know, why didn't he stop the events that lead to Mass Effect 1? He clearly has control of the Citadel functions and is aware of things going on outside such as the Geth and the Illusive Man's plans. Why couldn't he stop the Protheans from modifying the Keepers' signal? They're gathering bodies on the Citadel (presumably to build another Human Reaper... somewhere).

Is he a near powerless figurehead trapped by his own devices? An interesting theory that would explain why he is unable to exert any influences on the outside. It'd also be a clever explanation as to why his avatar is a child: he is a symbol of all that is helpless that can not be saved (since he always ends up destroyed, replaced, or rendered irrelevant). If so, why does it have anything to do with the Crucible at all? It also robs the Catalyst of the aura of power that the scene is definitely trying to give it.

Is it just Harbinger screwing with my head in attempt to distract Shepard with indecision long enough for Reapers to attack the Citadel? Well, why not?

It's not that I am trying to fish for details where it's not necessary (like, say, asking what Truth's real name or how big the remaining Covenant Fleet is at the climax of The Covenant on Halo 3), but rather trying to get clarification on the character and its role so I can understand what exactly is going on (like, say, asking exactly how much Truth knows about Halo's true purpose at the climax of The Covenant). Does the ending play out the same without this information? Yeah, but the story suffers greatly without it.

I suppose the best question would be this: Would the game explaining the Catalyst and its capabilities really felt out of place?

I suppose we'll agree to disagree.

And, yeah, Harbinger is inconsequential, but it's still bad writing to bring up something as a major plotpoint and never follow through. And I doubt any novel will ever clarify on this.

I don't consider theories like that until Bioware confirms it. IMO it's just people trying to find a reason for an ending they didn't approve of.

I hope you are right, but I don't like that a Bioware employee specifically linked a person with questions about the ending to that threat. Either it's a troll attempt in poor taste or they're trying to say something.
devil_mingy

Mar 13, 2012 12:24 pm GMT
Also, I just want to add that this has been a refreshingly good debate. All talk and no malice. Thank you for restoring my faith in digital communication.
moshaspartan2

Mar 13, 2012 12:55 pm GMT
the ending falls apart under the slightest amount of logical thought and really deserves no long winded debate. to argue that somebody could misunderstand it is also giving it far too much credit. there really is no depth or hidden meaning lurking under the surface, just a whole load of silly bollocks.

great game, though. just gonna be hard to replay the series in the future knowing what lies at the end.
---
R.I.P Jack-1996-2007
~MK marksman~
devil_mingy

Mar 13, 2012 1:03 pm GMT
^You don't know me very well. I can have a long winded debate about anything.

Anybody remember the 100 or so post debate I had with Cornered Fox about the misnomer of Covenant and UNSC naming conventions when dealing with outlier vehicles?

... yeah
_Sawyer

Mar 13, 2012 1:11 pm GMT
From: devil mingy
I suppose we'll agree to disagree.

Yep. If I continue from here it'll probably end up going in circles. Don't wanna argue all day anyway.

From: moshaspartan2
the ending falls apart under the slightest amount of logical thought and really deserves no long winded debate. to argue that somebody could misunderstand it is also giving it far too much credit. there really is no depth or hidden meaning lurking under the surface, just a whole load of silly bollocks.

I was just saying that, according to youtube comments on the portion after the credits, people got the impression that it was all a dream or a bedtime story when that's not the case.
---
Teh Real Dejkha
"I don't know why everyone is on your side but when I see and ass i point them out. And you friend, is a big ass" - Rizz02125 to me
moshaspartan2

Mar 13, 2012 1:25 pm GMT
yeah, but im annoyed, so everybody just shut up.

>_>

in all honesty, there are some compelling points for the whole indoctrination argument. of course, fact of the matter is that if the theory is proven to be correct, it simply means that bioware either arent giving us an actual ending after all these years, or they intend to sell us the conclusion. good grief, i would take a (somehow) worse ending than the one we got over that alternative.
---
R.I.P Jack-1996-2007
~MK marksman~
GreyedPheonix

Mar 13, 2012 1:27 pm GMT
*ignores walls of text and sits up in the rafters drinking having finished furnishing the back room and building the dividing wall*
---
"Cao ni zu zong shi ba dai"
::~~\\...Zensunni madman of Gamefaqs...//~~::
devil_mingy

Mar 13, 2012 2:44 pm GMT
*ignores GreyedPheonix and continues to build around him*

in all honesty, there are some compelling points for the whole indoctrination argument. of course, fact of the matter is that if the theory is proven to be correct, it simply means that bioware either arent giving us an actual ending after all these years, or they intend to sell us the conclusion. good grief, i would take a (somehow) worse ending than the one we got over that alternative.

It's kind of funny, because I have been following the theory and it does make a bit of sense, even if most of its evidence is, as _Sawyer said, people seeing what they want to see. However, it does explain all of my questions, explains the floaty abstractness of the final standoff, and explains all of the dumb elements about the Normandy landing (Liara's discussion about finding a nice quiet world after it's over, dead squadmates coming back to life, etc).

However, at the end of the day, I really don't think it's plausible in the least, mostly because this ending takes my biggest problem with the end (no closure) and not only fails to solve it, it actually makes it worse. I think there's another reason for why the scene plays out like it does.

When I finished Mass Effect 3, I felt much like I did at the end of Matrix Revolutions, Southland Tales, and Rob Zombie's Halloween 2. For the record, I still dislike all of these (although only the ending of ME3, rest of the game is fantastic), but I see merit in what they tried to do. They all suffer from the same problem: the writers have a very deep idea about what drives the story and a philosophical quandry to go with it, but are utterly unable to express it in a justifiable way.

Still, one nice thing is that I can discuss my grievances in excruciating detail with someone of differing opinion without being flamed or told I'm just too "mainstream" to understand it (Good job keeping it classy, Bioware).
_Sawyer

Mar 13, 2012 2:46 pm GMT
*ME3 SPOILERS (Not really, but just in case)*

I'm gonna guess DLC centered around closure is almost inevitable. Bioware very clearly was thinking of one thing when making the ending: the next part in the franchise. The lack of closure is the one complaint that seems to be universal among fans. And quite frankly, any content we get from now on will be bittersweet until we have said closure.
---
Teh Real Dejkha
"I don't know why everyone is on your side but when I see and ass i point them out. And you friend, is a big ass" - Rizz02125 to me
devil_mingy

Mar 13, 2012 3:21 pm GMT
[This message was deleted at the request of the original poster]
_Sawyer

Mar 13, 2012 3:22 pm GMT
Wow, I just read a couple things that gave me reason to hope:

https://twitter.com/#!/masseffect/status/179284259461283840

https://twitter.com/#!/GambleMike/status/177942797880541185

If they're saying what I think, it's that there is reason not to complain but they can't say why since the game only came out a week ago. So it sounds like we might be getting what we want, whether it be sooner or later. Here's to hoping.
---
Teh Real Dejkha
"I don't know why everyone is on your side but when I see and ass i point them out. And you friend, is a big ass" - Rizz02125 to me
devil_mingy

Mar 13, 2012 3:29 pm GMT
I hope so. Then again, they already lied once.

www.eurogamer.net/articles/2012-02-02-bioware-mass-effect-3-ending-will-make-some-people-angry

More answers than questions, my ass.

Also, while I know you don't mind the ending, is there anyone who is extremely happy with it? I have yet to find someone who is completely satisfied with the ending.

I would just prefer not to get my hopes up.
_Sawyer

Mar 13, 2012 3:29 pm GMT
Right now I'm not concerned with whether or not they've lied. The ending is how it is and I'm choosing to hope that they have something planned for it.
---
Teh Real Dejkha
"I don't know why everyone is on your side but when I see and ass i point them out. And you friend, is a big ass" - Rizz02125 to me
logannhunter

Mar 13, 2012 3:57 pm GMT
Ok, I haven't finished ME3 yet, so here's hoping. I'm getting pretty close, but my husband is off from work so he's catching up. However it ends I've still got my other game with Garrus as a love interest and I'm a gonna play that one for sure.

Thank you, rat, for working so hard on the room. It looks wonderful!!!!
I think I'll sit back here and not read the text as well and propose a toast to all your hard work

Cheers!
---
"A quarantine zone for a plague that kills turians. Why don't we go anywhere nice?" Mass Effect 2
Only the strongest will survive
Lead me to heaven when we die
I have a shadow on the wall
I'll be the one to save us all......."Blow Me Away"
logannhunter

Mar 13, 2012 8:37 pm GMT
mosha, please answer my pm......my husband is about to finish the game. Of course I knew he'd beat me to it I'm not going to watch.
---
"A quarantine zone for a plague that kills turians. Why don't we go anywhere nice?" Mass Effect 2
Only the strongest will survive
Lead me to heaven when we die
I have a shadow on the wall
I'll be the one to save us all......."Blow Me Away"
moshaspartan2

Mar 14, 2012 2:18 am GMT
there we go, sent you a message.
---
R.I.P Jack-1996-2007
~MK marksman~