Mass Effect 3

[synthetic]

Like said, good series. Forget about the endings in third and make your own I actually stopped reading that crap as soon as the kid popped up. I was so distraught I don't even know what ending I got lol. I just ran around and fell off into some beam.

I did manage to get full renegade by sticking to at least some personal morals, though. At least I remember somesuch. I definitely had few full renegade chars at least in first two games, and I generally don't bother if the game forces you 100% into asshole mode and makes you torture bunny wabbits for alignment points. ME actually made me appreciate the renegade options in many cases. Punching the poor reporter might've been a bit of a stretch, though, but there were plenty others that got what they deserved.

[Aidan]

Debatable. With Paragon, you're intelligent and have the ability to guide people down the 'right' path via deductive reasoning and proper logic.

IRL, I wouldn't make ruthless decisions unless reasoning was out of the question.

That is why I do not want to play Renegade (although it is not ALL ruthless). I would feel like shit having played paragon, and getting to know the good side of the characters, having to kill them / slap them around at their worst.

[James]

Mass Effect has strong, 80s-edge dialogue with some characters like Garrus. Love that guy.

[Psychotic]

IRL, I wouldn't make ruthless decisions unless reasoning was out of the question.

Don't think of it from your perspective but from the characters.

If you had the ruthless personality that constitutes the majority of Renegade Shepherd you wouldn't be questioning it, you'd be simply doing it. You'd be questioning the Paragon method as weak and slow.

I don't see the Renegade path as ruthless and maniacal, I see it as deliberate and logical, perhaps too logical. The idea is that you must be willing to make sacrifices for the greater good, even if that requires the death of many, including innocents.

The dialogue options presented make Renegade Shepherd out to be a dick but I find that if we were to bring him to the "real world" it would be less about being a sarcastic prick and more about having no compromise under any circumstances.

[clyzm]

Full renegade in ME2 made everyone die during the suicide mission

[synthetic]

Uhh, I guess we are talking about paragon/renegade hard-line role-play rather than about maintaining certain amount of points. Wasn't it technically possible to max both renegade and paragon, or pretty close to that?

[clyzm]

I meant full as in took every speech route & action during the stupid QTEs

[Aidan]

IRL, I wouldn't make ruthless decisions unless reasoning was out of the question.

Don't think of it from your perspective but from the characters.

The purpose of role play is to bring the player's own decision-making traits and personality into the main character. This is also why you can customize Shep completely. The fighting style YOU would play with, the appearance YOU would have, clicking par/ren sequences as YOU see fit. The game is essentially about YOUR decisions. Shepard doesn't have his own perspective. YOU are his perspective.

If you had the ruthless personality that constitutes the majority of Renegade Shepherd you wouldn't be questioning it, you'd be simply doing it. You'd be questioning the Paragon method as weak and slow.

This completely contradicts your previous point, although there is validity in how an aggressive player would make decisions. I agree with that.

I don't see the Renegade path as ruthless and maniacal, I see it as deliberate and logical, perhaps too logical. The idea is that you must be willing to make sacrifices for the greater good, even if that requires the death of many, including innocents.

It is VERY ruthless. Killing and hurting others to progress.

As Derek said...

Full renegade in ME2 made everyone die during the suicide mission

In dialogue trees, the player is presented with many options. The renegade option 90% of the time is a reckless decision, or ruthless 'shortcut.' The strange part is that half of the renegade options are military-based decisions, so I don't necessarily deem most renegade options as 'bad.' I never said they were maniacal either; Just ruthless, and often quite unnecessary.

The dialogue options presented make Renegade Shepherd out to be a dick but I find that if we were to bring him to the "real world" it would be less about being a sarcastic prick and more about having no compromise under any circumstances.

Devaluing Shep's dick-ish tendencies in the real world is a fallacy of your own though. If brought to the real world, he would still be a dick. As such, a 'dick' in real life, would most definitely chose the 'dick' options in-game.

[Psychotic]

I was trying to instil a deeper character rather than the one we see, which is just about killing and being an asshole.


The problem I find when we try to look at a character in BioWare's games as the black and white character it is we end up getting a very dull story. BioWare games are very black and white: You are either a paragon or an asshole. The in-between is being a sarcastic prick like in Dragon Age 2, which is only fun for a while.

Personally, I didn't like the Renegade option as much as the Paragon ones but, in all honestly, I tend not to like any moral action in RPGs because they feel horribly forced. The only ones I've ever liked were in The Witcher series, where it wasn't immediately obvious how my actions would affect the outcome of the game.

BioWare's games have this forced idea of morality: You're either good or evil, and it's not even evil. You're just an asshole. At least let me choose a side like Knights of the Old Republic (which happened far too late but still). There's no depth in it to begin with, you might as well have it chosen for you because it wouldn't change much.

As such, a 'dick' in real life, would most definitely chose the 'dick' options in-game.

I totally appreciate you calling me a dick because I chose a different option than you in a video game. I guess I must be a murderous psychopath if I kill any innocent person in Grand Theft Auto, too!

I am a total asshole because of the actions I choose in a video game, it clearly has nothing to do with me just wanting to have fun.

That's sarcasm, by the way. I hope I don't have to explain why that's a poor argument.

[Aidan]

I was trying to instil a deeper character rather than the one we see, which is just about killing and being an asshole.


The problem I find when we try to look at a character in BioWare's games as the black and white character it is we end up getting a very dull story. BioWare games are very black and white: You are either a paragon or an asshole. The in-between is being a sarcastic prick like in Dragon Age 2, which is only fun for a while.

Personally, I didn't like the Renegade option as much as the Paragon ones but, in all honestly, I tend not to like any moral action in RPGs because they feel horribly forced. The only ones I've ever liked were in The Witcher series, where it wasn't immediately obvious how my actions would affect the outcome of the game.

BioWare's games have this forced idea of morality: You're either good or evil, and it's not even evil. You're just an asshole. At least let me choose a side like Knights of the Old Republic (which happened far too late but still). There's no depth in it to begin with, you might as well have it chosen for you because it wouldn't change much.

As such, a 'dick' in real life, would most definitely chose the 'dick' options in-game.

I totally appreciate you calling me a dick because I chose a different option than you in a video game. I guess I must be a murderous psychopath if I kill any innocent person in Grand Theft Auto, too!

I am a total asshole because of the actions I choose in a video game, it clearly has nothing to do with me just wanting to have fun.

That's sarcasm, by the way. I hope I don't have to explain why that's a poor argument.

Bioware doesn't have a good enough think-tank to create "grey" in Mass Effect. It's almost as if The Illusive Man (their own fucking character) is making a hillarious mockery of themselves...

If the plot tree was a more advanced, we would see more accurate reflection on the player controlling Shep.

[clyzm]

Renegade isn't as ruthless as you make it

Example: Tali's space gypsy friend in ME2 during one of the first missions, the one by all the computer monitors, I never saw a reason for that guy to exist other than to hinder progress

[Aidan]

Renegade isn't as ruthless as you make it

Example: Tali's space gypsy friend in ME2 during one of the first missions, the one by all the computer monitors, I never saw a reason for that guy to exist other than to hinder progress

That is precisely why I said half of renegade options are military-based.

It's as if Bioware didn't know what they wanted out of the renegade experience. It's like a combination of being a ruthless dick, and making every-day military-type decisions.

However, based on the given text, and the actions Shepard actually takes, it can be quite misleading. In addition, the click responses can also be questionable at times

P.S. 6000th post. I'm a celebrate.

[Psychotic]

Honestly, I always thought BioWare had the resources to make the "varying shades of grey" storylines I've come to like, they simply choose not to.

Easier to rehash the same story with new colours and models than to actually come up with something different.

I was disappointed with ME3's ending but I really shouldn't have been all that surprised. BioWare has decent dialogue and strong character development but poor plots have always been their "style", so to speak.

[Aidan]

MASS EFFECT THREE


Yeah, either they were being lazy, or again... time/budget constraints from EA.


What is strange about the ending is that it's as if the lead writer (because all the writers that kept his crazy plot solutions in check decided to leave the studio) was basing his conclusion off of string theory, and multidimensional black-hole theories (although black holes are a giant focal point of mass, theories arise that if they are able to consume light, the pull of mass would be quicker, and so given the theory of relativity, we would either go back in time, or end up in another 'space').


String theory is essentially multiple universes linked to eachother, that of which constantly recycle, etc. In plot, writers speak of reapers finding solution of dark matter consumption. Which is somehow supposed to explain reapers recycling the galaxy.

It's as if he was actually developing something very complex (AND COMPLEX WAS DEFINITELY NOT A GOOD CALL GIVEN THE STORYLINE), and became stumped at a point; Implemented it into the game anyway, quick to call it a complex abstract theory and hope it will fly.

[Psychotic]

All that we've been "told" is that two of the writers divorced themselves from the group to go circlejerk about their ideas in a corner and by the time the others were told it was far too late to change anything.

That part is pure conjecture. The only "truth" we have is that the original ending was designed around the concept of dark energy, a concept only hinted at in Mass Effect 2 (specifically The Arrival DLC) and quite clearly scrapped once the previous author had left to work on TOR.

[clyzm]

so given the theory of relativity, we would either go back in time, or end up in another 'space'

You're confusing wormholes with black holes

String theory is essentially multiple universes linked to eachother

You're confusing string theory with parallel universes

[synthetic]

String theory became redundant while ago due to contradicting its purpose through multiple alternative string theories. A separate theory had to be combined with string theory(ies) for it to have any serious (theoretical) basis.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/M-theory

[Aidan]

so given the theory of relativity, we would either go back in time, or end up in another 'space'

You're confusing wormholes with black holes

String theory is essentially multiple universes linked to eachother

You're confusing string theory with parallel universes

No, I'm not confusing anything.

There is still speculation of what a black hole could do asides from the highly-probable (coined) spegettification. Black holes still consist of many properties in question, hence further dimensional/time-may-be-an-entity theories.

Worm holes are more-so a theoretical galactic shortcut to another area of space. It COULD land us in another dimension, but so could a black hole. To argue that only one has dimensional properties is moot.

String theory is dimensional, and not parallel. Parallel is within the same universe (of alternate options/consistency), where as dimensional is within another universe.


Back on topic, it seems as though Bioware was trying pass an advanced concept through Novice writers.

[Tantalus]

Black holes COULD send us into another universe, but unlike theoretical worm holes that can apparently be travelled through 'normally', as if it were a consistent part of space. Black holes could send our MATTER into another dimension, but we would die WAAAAAAAAY before then, thanks to the 8 million G Force.

[synthetic]

Since when are worm holes theoretical but black holes acting as portals are not?

Black hole gravity and radiation aside, displacing matter by means of jumping through wormhole does not sound all that safe to me either.

[clyzm]

No, I'm not confusing anything.

There is still speculation of what a black hole could do asides from the highly-probable (coined) spegettification. Black holes still consist of many properties in question, hence further dimensional/time-may-be-an-entity theories.

Worm holes are more-so a theoretical galactic shortcut to another area of space. It COULD land us in another dimension, but so could a black hole. To argue that only one has dimensional properties is moot.

String theory is dimensional, and not parallel. Parallel is within the same universe (of alternate options/consistency), where as dimensional is within another universe.

It's just funny that you cite the theory of relativity and in the same sentence say a black hole can propel us to different dimensions

As if we can experience anything above the third dimension

As if a black hole can do anything besides pull everything into the event horizon

I'm pretty (99%) sure you're thinking of parallel universes, which, contrary to what your post said, means multiple universes, not a single one. It's a theory about as well-explained and reasoned as your whole "black holes are time portals" idea

I'm sorry but I don't think you are too familiar with the idea of relativity Aidan, because everything you just said violates pretty much everything about it

Then again all this stuff is theoretical

[Psychotic]

It's just funny that you cite the theory of relativity and in the same sentence say a black hole can propel us to different dimensions

I think he is referring to "dimensions" as in another space - a separate universe - not "dimension" as in time and space. In science fiction are "parallel universe" and a "parallel dimension" are used interchangeably.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parallel_universe_(fiction)

Other than that don't mind me, I'm not here to take sides, merely trying to uinderstand from both perspectives.

[Aidan]

To clarify, I'll say "Multiverse." http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Multiverse


Parallel and Dimensional are used in science as both synonyms, and antonyms given the situation.





In a parallel universe (for instance), there are multiple versions of yourself carrying on about life in a different way for each timeline. Although each branch of what you may be doing are often referred to as Dimensions, it is not fully dimensional, as everything takes place in the exact same box of space.

A "multiverse," or true dimensional universe has separate versions of space. With complete different subject matter in each. You are in world number one, but do not exist in any other.


I THINK WHERE MY BRAIN BEGINS TO NUMB, is when I consider that numerous dimensional theories can possibly be assimilated into another. The term "Dimensional" simply pertains to another realm that is not our own, and can be applied many ways in science. The word defines itself in many theories where as the Dimensional 'term' is thrown about in many others.

[youtube]cPbd2v36h6A[/youtube]

As Derek said, they ARE all theories. None of us are right/wrong. It is only possible to be right/wrong about the construct of a specific theory itself.

Let me know your opinions. I love conversations like these albeit they're usually pointless.

[Psychotic]

Best if we split those posts in another topic, since the multiverse and all the speculation on it has very little to do with Mass Effect.

My opinions on the matter though:

Quantum Mechanics are an interesting but confusing topic. If I recall correctly it is something Derek has been into for a while now, but other than a basic curiousness on some of the questions it poses I don't travel too far into it. I find it great for stories and television and not much else, being subject to far too much speculation for my tastes.

That, and much of the time it's just far too confusing. I don't claim to know about or understand quantum mechanics, nor do I think anyone truly can in the same way we understand other sciences. The subject is about as broad as Philosophy itself.

This isn't bad or good, it merely is. It's an interesting field to ponder on, if nothing else. But, as said, it's also entirely unrelated to Mass Effect (other than the speculation that it could be related, which it's likely not). Don't think too deeply into the ending of Mass Effect 3: It was a poor ending, at least in my eyes. I don't think much more has to be said.

If it was destined to be greater they could have told us their original intentions. The original author has already done so, but the ones who worked on ME3 have chosen not to. Based on this I say what we see is what we get. An grand series marred by a horribly convoluted ending. Classic BioWare, really.

[clyzm]

Best if we split those posts in another topic, since the multiverse and all the speculation on it has very little to do with Mass Effect.

We're discussing mass effect lore bro isn't element zero in that game like mini black holes anyway

[Aidan]

Best if we split those posts in another topic, since the multiverse and all the speculation on it has very little to do with Mass Effect.

We're discussing mass effect lore bro isn't element zero in that game like mini black holes anyway

Lol, eezo in ME is considered as it's own element, where in our Science we know "Element 0" as Neutronium, or Antimatter.

[Psychotic]

Best if we split those posts in another topic, since the multiverse and all the speculation on it has very little to do with Mass Effect.

We're discussing mass effect lore bro isn't element zero in that game like mini black holes anyway

Element Zero is it's own element. The idea of dark matter isn't particularly discussed much, even though it totally should have been.

[Aidan]

The idea of dark matter isn't particularly discussed much, even though it totally should have been.

Yeah man, and they totally could have saved themselves with it if they didn't get lazy/abstract with the story.


-Dark matter slowly consuming universe

-Reapers seeking solution

-Reapers cycling organic life in fear of disarray

-Shepard: "How do you know killing organic life is going to solve anything"

-Shepard kills Reapers, but dies himself

-Universe is saved from reapers, but now they have dark matter to worry about. (You can chose multiple endings, but ME4 will not carry over data, and will refresh series thus starting after the good ending)

-End ME3, leaving ME4 completely open.

(-hell, if they want to get complex with it, they CAN carry over data if they want... replay value would go through the roof)


You get the rough idea of what I'm getting at...

[Psychotic]

The original ending actually divulged into matters of dark matter and entropy and it all sounded very interesting. It was never fleshed out but the concept was far better than, "We kill you so you don't kill yourselves!".

[Aidan]

http://www.fanfiction.net/s/8456288/1/W ... m-the-past