-
Re: Mass Effect 3.5B: Taste the Rainbow (Story and Ending Discussion; Spoilers!)
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Psyren
Let me ask a more direct question then - what is there to be gained by assuming apocalypse? What does assuming mass destruction, death and starvation in the wake of a galactic war get us?
NOTHING. Nothing is gained by the assumption, because it's not a fanwank! People didn't set out to specifically decide that everyone was going to die, that was just the assumption that happened based on information given. Proving it wrong after the fact doesn't automatically make it a stupid assumption.
-
Re: Mass Effect 3.5B: Taste the Rainbow (Story and Ending Discussion; Spoilers!)
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Derthric
But when it follows a completely unsatisfactory resolution it just gets included into the "everything wrong pile".
But this is exactly my problem - I feel as though, in the effort to make that pile as large as possible, things are being thrown onto it that have very simple reasons not to be there, like supernova relays.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Derthric
The Codex gives us the 12 ly/day speed but it also says its largely impractical and takes decades and centuries because of drive discharge and fuel. Now we just ignore that second part?
Why not? The Reapers did, after all.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Fawkes
NOTHING. Nothing is gained by the assumption, because it's not a fanwank! People didn't set out to specifically decide that everyone was going to die, that was just the assumption that happened based on information given. Proving it wrong after the fact doesn't automatically make it a stupid assumption.
That's fair - I can see how that initial despair could have led to conclusions like these, and general anger over the endings lead to their spread. But now that they have been debunked though, they should no longer be clung to.
-
Re: Mass Effect 3.5B: Taste the Rainbow (Story and Ending Discussion; Spoilers!)
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Psyren
The 12 ly/day figure and the size of the galaxy both come from ME1, so I don't see how that could be a retcon, but anyway...
Let me ask a more direct question then - what is there to be gained by assuming apocalypse? What does assuming mass destruction, death and starvation in the wake of a galactic war get us?
Finding the myriad ways that as many people can survive, and thrive, as possible - I find that mental exercise to be far more engaging and uplifting than simply wallowing in dreariness. Doubly so since one or many of them will be canonized in the EC.
Like I've said I've never thought galactic apocalypse. I've freely accepted that by the time of the Stargazer at least one planet has carved out a survivable future. Probably more that we didn't get to see due to the fact that Bioware couldn't be bothered to show them.
However I just can't take Bioware at their word when they wave their hand and say "oh right well nobody starved... Yeap entire galaxy trashed capital planets burned to the bedrock but... nobody starves in the entire galaxy." Same way that I dislike them waving their hand saying "Oh yeah the Mass Relays are rebuilt within the week" or "Everybody you met on the Citadel managed to get to the super cool Kinetic shelters that were totally there for Saren's invasion despite everybody you know dying that time" These are painfully obvious handwaves and they add nothing to the narrative and only serve to underscore how completely the ending failed.
-
Re: Mass Effect 3.5B: Taste the Rainbow (Story and Ending Discussion; Spoilers!)
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Psyren
But this is exactly my problem - I feel as though, in the effort to make that pile as large as possible, things are being thrown onto it that have very simple reasons not to be there, like supernova relays.
Exactly.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Psyren
Why not? The Reapers did, after all.
Exactly.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Psyren
That's fair - I can see how that initial despair could have led to conclusions like these, and general anger over the endings lead to their spread. But now that they have been debunked though, they should no longer be clung to.
Exactly.
-
Re: Mass Effect 3.5B: Taste the Rainbow (Story and Ending Discussion; Spoilers!)
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Psyren
But this is exactly my problem - I feel as though, in the effort to make that pile as large as possible, things are being thrown onto it that have very simple reasons not to be there, like supernova relays.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Avilan the Grey
Exactly.
I am not trying to make the pile as big as possible, I'm pointing out that the pile is that big.
Also please stop ascribing motivations to people.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Psyren
Why not? The Reapers did, after all.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Avilan the Grey
Exactly.
But we are not them, not saying these things are impossibilities just monumental tasks, and one of several presented at the same time. Time is a factor in all these things, it just depends on how you perceive the capabilities of a shattered civilization after the war. If you think them capable of juggling all that then ok. It did not seem as though they would be able to. It has since been handwaved, more on that down below.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Psyren
That's fair - I can see how that initial despair could have led to conclusions like these, and general anger over the endings lead to their spread. But now that they have been debunked though, they should no longer be clung to.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Avilan the Grey
Exactly.
Once more you are ascribing motivations when I am sitting here saying this is our logic path. It may not be the one you go down or the one they intended. However their method of debunking relies upon them simply handwaving. If its canon its canon, its still poor storytelling. Which leads me back to my points raised here. Address these and the parts make sense.
Galaxy is fine, or Galactic Dark Age can work when presented well. Either way it was not presented well.
-
Re: Mass Effect 3.5B: Taste the Rainbow (Story and Ending Discussion; Spoilers!)
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Derthric
I am not trying to make the pile as big as possible, I'm pointing out that the pile is that big.
Also please stop ascribing motivations to people.
Putting aside that I never said "Derthric is making the pile as big as possible!" - I'm sorry, but I can think of no other reason why anyone would so willfully deny the positive possibilities while so wholly fixating on the negative ones.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Derthric
But we are not them, not saying these things are impossibilities just monumental tasks, and one of several presented at the same time. Time is a factor in all these things, it just depends on how you perceive the capabilities of a shattered civilization after the war. If you think them capable of juggling all that then ok. It did not seem as though they would be able to. It has since been handwaved, more on that down below.
I honestly don't think they're that monumental - we have the brightest minds in the galaxy floating around in Sol, and all this Reaper tech for them to analyze floating with them, and no greater priority aside from maybe communication with homeworlds to re-establish and caring for any survivors on the Citadel or Earth. What must be done, can be, is my personal motto - and one that applies quite well here.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Derthric
Once more you are ascribing motivations when I am sitting here saying this is our logic path. It may not be the one you go down or the one they intended. However their method of debunking relies upon them simply handwaving. If its canon its canon, its still poor storytelling.
Correction: it is your logic path, and as I have clearly shown the logic can just as easily lead in the other direction. For example: logically, Quarians that have left half their people (if not more) behind on their homeworld should have plenty of spare capacity to feed Turians, so long as they don't mind eating veggies for awhile. So starvation is as easily disproven as proven.
From there it becomes a matter of preference, which is where unfortunately I have to ascribe motivation (though not to you specifically) because again I can think of no other reason why the negative possibilities hold such allure.
That last statement is quite subjective and unfortunately I don't agree. Handwaving is the grease that keeps the narrative flowing smoothly, otherwise you end up bogged down in minutiae. As Jim Sterling put it, the beauty about art is that it has no rules, so saying "X amount of handwaving is bad writing, but (X-Y) amount is good" feels arbitrary on its face.
-
Re: Mass Effect 3.5B: Taste the Rainbow (Story and Ending Discussion; Spoilers!)
Part of the problem is that it's only half the canon. Canon says that the galaxy is that far apart? Sure. It also says the colony worlds are decades of travel apart without the relays. So either FTL is now what you think it is or part of the canon is contradictory. It's a game of "if we ignore these facts we get conclusion A, if we ignore those facts we get conclusion B". And if we don't ignore any facts we get a migraine. That's the problem with this kind of ending in this kind of game.
There is nothing in game that adequately sets the stage for the moronic piece of art they called the ending. So we had to piece it together ourselves with what canon we knew, while our requests for clarification were flippantly denied, leaving us to follow the trails. Earth is not an agrarian society in the ME setting: it's described as polluted and hideously over-populated, and that wasn't going to change once they gained "instant" access to garden worlds - which sure as heck isn't a circumstance to encourage terrestrial farming. Everyone's in the same boat on that front, nobody was prepared for a life with years/decades long round trips, and nobody except maybe the Turians (thanks to Garrus) had the time or foresight to adjust before the unthinkable became reality. Ergo: Food would be a logical concern. It took Bioware PR a month to say it officially wasn't, leaving us to stew.
What's to be gained in making up a doomsday scenario for this game? Nothing. The point is that we shouldn't be forced to make up the ending for ourselves in the first place. That is why I, at least, am still angry about it.
-
Re: Mass Effect 3.5B: Taste the Rainbow (Story and Ending Discussion; Spoilers!)
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Psyren
Putting aside that I never said "Derthric is making the pile as big as possible!" - I'm sorry, but I can think of no other reason why anyone would so willfully deny the positive possibilities while so wholly fixating on the negative ones.
It need not be my motivations you are ascribing. But people's in general.
What I am saying is you cannot ignore the negatives? Scope and Scale are issues presented with rebuilding and needto be factored in as does political and economic stability as these are things that are included in the series to this point.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Psyren
I honestly don't think they're that monumental - we have the brightest minds in the galaxy floating around in Sol, and all this Reaper tech for them to analyze floating with them, and no greater priority aside from maybe communication with homeworlds to re-establish and caring for any survivors on the Citadel or Earth. What must be done, can be, is my personal motto - and one that applies quite well here.
Then we disagree on the scale of things. Rebuilding a city takes time and effort, look at any disaster relief we have now. Now scale that up to planets and civilizations as a whole and its not something that a dedicated few can do.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Psyren
Correction: it is your logic path, and as I have clearly shown the logic can just as easily lead in the other direction. For example: logically, Quarians that have left half their people (if not more) behind on their homeworld should have plenty of spare capacity to feed Turians, so long as they don't mind eating veggies for awhile. So starvation is as easily disproven as proven.
From there it becomes a matter of preference, which is where unfortunately I have to ascribe motivation (though not to you specifically) because again I can think of no other reason why the negative possibilities hold such allure.
That last statement is quite subjective and unfortunately I don't agree. Handwaving is the grease that keeps the narrative flowing smoothly, otherwise you end up bogged down in minutiae. As Jim Sterling put it, the beauty about art is that it has no rules, so saying "X amount of handwaving is bad writing, but (X-Y) amount is good" feels arbitrary on its face.
When I used the term "our" I meant those of us who espoused the Dark Age theory, not yorus and mine as a collective. I apologize if you thought I was trying to push you into my line of thinking.
And the motivations thing, its a pet peeve of mine and I admit I overacted. Once more I apologize.
There is a point where we must agree to disagree. The amount of handwaving isn't a judgement on its own, it makes up much of suspension of disbelief. What I am saying is the ending so borks up suspension of disbelief for me that handwaves become all the more glaring and further degrade the story. Like I said in a previous post, once you see the man behind the curtain the magic is gone.
Handwaving, like tropes, are not all bad. Ricky Gervais has a great quote that I am about to unintentionally butcher "There is nothing you shouldn't joke about, just jokes you should not tell. For no other reason then they are not funny". Sometimes saying a wizard did it works, sometimes it does not. To me in this case it doesn't work.
I just hope they don't settle for epilogues that explain away the Dark Age but rather address the more jarring problems in the Narrative. Please put the curtain back up Bioware.
-
Re: Mass Effect 3.5B: Taste the Rainbow (Story and Ending Discussion; Spoilers!)
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Psyren
Let me ask a more direct question then - what is there to be gained by assuming apocalypse? What does assuming mass destruction, death and starvation in the wake of a galactic war get us?
Finding the myriad ways that as many people can survive, and thrive, as possible - I find that mental exercise to be far more engaging and uplifting than simply wallowing in dreariness. Doubly so since one or many of them will be canonized in the EC.
Nothing, just as there is nothing to be gained by speculating that everything will be all right. It's a fun thing to do while we wait and find out what else is in store for the ME universe. As for why the negative aspects edge out over the positive, I couldn't tell you for anyone but me.
All of the things that you've been bringing up over the past several pages are all possible--even reverse engineering reaper tech to allow for more freedom in FTL drives--but they're going to take time. Time that the fleet in the Sol system might not have, depending on how much they brought with them and how much earth's resources can be used. It's all speculation.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Psyren
Putting aside that I never said "Derthric is making the pile as big as possible!" - I'm sorry, but I can think of no other reason why anyone would so willfully deny the positive possibilities while so wholly fixating on the negative ones.
While I don't really want to speak for anyone else, it's not so much willfully denying the positive possibilities so much as it is recognizing how difficult it will be to make them realities in universe. Given the severe loss of life and industrial base, it would be unrealistic for the galaxy to be back on its feet in a year or two, perhaps even a decade or two. And in that time a lot of people are going to die from things like lack of resources, poor distribution of resources, infighting, and for everyone who does make it, it'll be that much harder.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Psyren
That last statement is quite subjective and unfortunately I don't agree. Handwaving is the grease that keeps the narrative flowing smoothly, otherwise you end up bogged down in minutiae. As Jim Sterling put it, the beauty about art is that it has no rules, so saying "X amount of handwaving is bad writing, but (X-Y) amount is good" feels arbitrary on its face.
I disagree. There's a big difference between overlooking detail to avoid bogging down (as in gameplay vs. story segregation) and handwaving all the detail away because they didn't think through all the possible consequences.
It's not really an issue of degree so much as it is an issue of purpose. If you're handwaving to improve pacing or avoid minutiae, it's fine. If you're handwaving because you couldn't adequately construct your plot or your conclusion, something has gone wrong.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Derthric
What I am saying is you cannot ignore the negatives? Scope and Scale are issues presented with rebuilding and needto be factored in as does political and economic stability as these are things that are included in the series to this point.
Then we disagree on the scale of things. Rebuilding a city takes time and effort, look at any disaster relief we have now. Now scale that up to planets and civilizations as a whole and its not something that a dedicated few can do.
I just hope they don't settle for epilogues that explain away the Dark Age but rather address the more jarring problems in the Narrative.
Exactly this, and this is what it seems that bioware is handwaving (from what little we know). Maybe the extended cut will include all the consequences of the ending, both good and bad, but chances are they won't go into that much detail.
-
Re: Mass Effect 3.5B: Taste the Rainbow (Story and Ending Discussion; Spoilers!)
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Calemyr
What's to be gained in making up a doomsday scenario for this game? Nothing. The point is that we shouldn't be forced to make up the ending for ourselves in the first place. That is why I, at least, am still angry about it.
I'm with you 100% on this, which is why I was clamoring for a DLC ending as much as everyone else.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Derthric
It need not be my motivations you are ascribing. But people's in general.
What I am saying is you cannot ignore the negatives? Scope and Scale are issues presented with rebuilding and needto be factored in as does political and economic stability as these are things that are included in the series to this point.
There are still a lot of gaps here that you and others are filling with current-gen explanations, then concluding these solutions to be inadequate. I don't think that's fair.
For instance, here's a simple one - how do people in the future eat? How far along has GM food gotten? Joker makes a throwaway quip about "vat-grown beef," yet something he has such a flip attitude towards is cutting-edge science today and could solve a lot of our own hunger problems. And his casual attitude towards suggests it's pretty widespread.
So will it really be that difficult to rebuild? I say no.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Derthric
Then we disagree on the scale of things. Rebuilding a city takes time and effort, look at any disaster relief we have now. Now scale that up to planets and civilizations as a whole and its not something that a dedicated few can do.
*points at bolded portion.*
Do you see the problem?
(Above directed to Evrine as well.)
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Derthric
When I used the term "our" I meant those of us who espoused the Dark Age theory, not yorus and mine as a collective. I apologize if you thought I was trying to push you into my line of thinking.
And the motivations thing, its a pet peeve of mine and I admit I overacted. Once more I apologize.
No worries. I apologize if I made you feel like I was ascribing motives to you that you didn't have.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Derthric
There is a point where we must agree to disagree. The amount of handwaving isn't a judgement on its own, it makes up much of suspension of disbelief. What I am saying is the ending so borks up suspension of disbelief for me that handwaves become all the more glaring and further degrade the story. Like I said in a previous post, once you see the man behind the curtain the magic is gone.
*snip*
Fair enough, I can do that.
-
Re: Mass Effect 3.5B: Taste the Rainbow (Story and Ending Discussion; Spoilers!)
Question. How many people here would be having issues with food or other doomsday scenarios if the mass relays had been destroyed, but Shephard had lived and been shown with his crew afterwards in a rebuilding galaxy?
-
Re: Mass Effect 3.5B: Taste the Rainbow (Story and Ending Discussion; Spoilers!)
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Anarion
Question. How many people here would be having issues with food or other doomsday scenarios if the mass relays had been destroyed, but Shephard had lived and been shown with his crew afterwards in a rebuilding galaxy?
Heck, even if we'd seen some evidence of a rebuilding galaxy, I guarantee that 50-75% of the grumbling would be mitigated. Of course, that leaves 25-50% grumbling about the Starbrat, but he deserves it.
-
Re: Mass Effect 3.5B: Taste the Rainbow (Story and Ending Discussion; Spoilers!)
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Anarion
Question. How many people here would be having issues with food or other doomsday scenarios if the mass relays had been destroyed, but Shephard had lived and been shown with his crew afterwards in a rebuilding galaxy?
*Raises hand.* One of my favorite game endings was Planescape: Torment. Endings don't have to be happy, they just have to be coherent, consistent, and ideally fulfilling.
Edit: *Lowers Hand.* You mean actually showing the galaxy working? Hmmm... depends on how much of the rebuilding was shown. Stargazer was added as proof that "not everyone dies", but provided no context for anything beyond that. Shepard's living or dying doesn't factor into my opinion on that front.
-
Re: Mass Effect 3.5B: Taste the Rainbow (Story and Ending Discussion; Spoilers!)
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Anarion
Question. How many people here would be having issues with food or other doomsday scenarios if the mass relays had been destroyed, but Shephard had lived and been shown with his crew afterwards in a rebuilding galaxy?
Also, it is important to note that, if played right, Shepard is some sort of magical super-diplomat. I'm sure he could figure out a way to distribute food resources adequately. :smalltongue:
-
Re: Mass Effect 3.5B: Taste the Rainbow (Story and Ending Discussion; Spoilers!)
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Anarion
Question. How many people here would be having issues with food or other doomsday scenarios if the mass relays had been destroyed, but Shephard had lived and been shown with his crew afterwards in a rebuilding galaxy?
If rebuilding efforts were shown, then by default we would have more information about the effects of the Rainbow Explosion, which is sort of the whole problem here.
-
Re: Mass Effect 3.5B: Taste the Rainbow (Story and Ending Discussion; Spoilers!)
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Anarion
Question. How many people here would be having issues with food or other doomsday scenarios if the mass relays had been destroyed, but Shephard had lived and been shown with his crew afterwards in a rebuilding galaxy?
It certainly would have mitigated a lot of it, but I don't know if it would have alleviated all of the issues, especially those regarding FTL travel. 12ly/day in 50 hour hops is pretty limiting. Not impossible, but not easy either.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fawkes
If rebuilding efforts were shown, then by default we would have more information about the effects of the Rainbow Explosion, which is sort of the whole problem here.
Exactly. Another issue is that each ending choice could play out in very different ways. In control, FTL probably won't be an issue because Shepard could control the reapers to make the necessary trips. For synthesis, well, it's too hard to tell how that might play out because too much is up in the air with it. For destroy, it may not be an issue given enough time, but that time is likely to be tough for everyone.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Psyren
*points at bolded portion.*
Do you see the problem?
(Above directed to Evrine as well.)
I don't, no. If you're saying that we're extrapolating based on how things currently are in the real world, I'd disagree to the extent that when or if we do so, it's only where the setting doesn't offer contradictions.
If you're trying to say something else, please clarify.
-
Re: Mass Effect 3.5B: Taste the Rainbow (Story and Ending Discussion; Spoilers!)
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Anarion
Question. How many people here would be having issues with food or other doomsday scenarios if the mass relays had been destroyed, but Shephard had lived and been shown with his crew afterwards in a rebuilding galaxy?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Landis963
Heck, even if we'd seen some evidence of a rebuilding galaxy, I guarantee that 50-75% of the grumbling would be mitigated. Of course, that leaves 25-50% grumbling about the Starbrat, but he deserves it.
I'd be torn, if the Catalyst does such a wonderful job of ripping the tapestry of the narrative apart its hard to ignore. However closure would help alot. My feeling is that it would have definitely helped stem the tide of anger had some denouement been included. But the underlying flaws are still there.
To Psyren,
Its all good, next round at the Citadel is on me.
-
Re: Mass Effect 3.5B: Taste the Rainbow (Story and Ending Discussion; Spoilers!)
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Evrine
All of the things that you've been bringing up over the past several pages are all possible--even reverse engineering reaper tech to allow for more freedom in FTL drives--but they're going to take time. Time that the fleet in the Sol system might not have, depending on how much they brought with them and how much earth's resources can be used. It's all speculation.
While I don't really want to speak for anyone else, it's not so much willfully denying the positive possibilities so much as it is recognizing how difficult it will be to make them realities in universe. Given the severe loss of life and industrial base, it would be unrealistic for the galaxy to be back on its feet in a year or two, perhaps even a decade or two. And in that time a lot of people are going to die from things like lack of resources, poor distribution of resources, infighting, and for everyone who does make it, it'll be that much harder.
*snip*
Evrine, is, once again, saying everything I would have said, and probably more rationally...
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Psyren
There are still a lot of gaps here that you and others are filling with current-gen explanations, then concluding these solutions to be inadequate. I don't think that's fair.
For instance, here's a simple one - how do people in the future eat? How far along has GM food gotten? Joker makes a throwaway quip about "vat-grown beef," yet something he has such a flip attitude towards is cutting-edge science today and could solve a lot of our own hunger problems. And his casual attitude towards suggests it's pretty widespread.
So will it really be that difficult to rebuild? I say no.
Given what we have seen of ME infrastructre, I don't think the ME universe is the several orders of magnitude1 better required. They don't have energy to matter replication, and omnigel microfabrication seems to have it's limitations.
We've seen their loading bays, and they are, while, fully automated, still using basic things like cranes and cargo containers, which says their shipping and transport still has the same time limitations in shipping and handling.
EVEN IF you have magic factories pumping out tools and vat grown wotsits, it won't take much less time to actually get that sent to where it's got to go.
It's logistics. ME is not Star Trek (and even in Star Trek they need stuff to make the replicators work.)
And damage control doesn't seem especially Earth-shatteringly awesome, considering when you go to places that have been attacked, they are still damaged for some time afterwards, even on the Citidel.
Clearing rubble and building stuff still takes time - unless you're suggesting ME technology allows you to build stuff like in Command & Conquer or something (which we have seen no evidence of). Building still appear to be made the old fashioned way, albiet with newer materials. It may be faster, yes, than modern stuff, but I doubt it's, like, ten times as fast.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Evrine
I don't, no. If you're saying that we're extrapolating based on how things currently are in the real world, I'd disagree to the extent that when or if we do so, it's only where the setting doesn't offer contradictions.
Basically, what he said.
Again.
(I'm beginning to think I should just let Evrine field all this stuff and confine myself to his cheerleading section...!)
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Anarion
Question. How many people here would be having issues with food or other doomsday scenarios if the mass relays had been destroyed, but Shephard had lived and been shown with his crew afterwards in a rebuilding galaxy?
*Raises hand*
If the question of previously-stated logistics had not been properly answered, damn straight I would.
If I have to make a choice between internal consistency and narrative/artisitic (etc) expression, I'll virtually always choose the former.
I'm personally not interested in what message you're trying to convey (for a kick-off, I don't appreciate being messaged at in general in my entertainment) if you weren't prepared to think far enough in advance to avoid running over your own established rules.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Fawkes
If rebuilding efforts were shown, then by default we would have more information about the effects of the Rainbow Explosion, which is sort of the whole problem here.
It certainly would have migitated my issues. At the very fracking minimum, show, don't tell, Bioware.
Rant incoming
Spoiler
Show
On a personal level, I absolutely LOATHE handwaving (as opposed to abstraction or omission of mechanical details) with the void-cold anti-fire of a billions frozen stars.
If we want to get out of the in-universe raw number crunching and into the authorial metareasoning, if the galaxy is was going to be fine after the relay destruction, why do it? If the Citidel was mostly going to survive, why blow it up in the first place? If those sort of events don't have a lasting impact, then they have little meaning.
Either the Reapers were a galactic-level threat or they weren't. Either the loss of the relays is a significant blow that SHOULD require time and effort to recoup from, or their importance has been vastly over-stated throughout the entire trilogy and everyone in the ME universe is a weapons-grade moron for relying on it as the only means of FTL transport when the alternative isn't actually that much worse.
If the galaxy can just shrug off the duel blows of the Reaper invasion and the relay destruction almost immediately and live relatively happily ever after (except for, apparently, Shepard and/or the Geth), then it cheapens the entire premise of the Reaper threat. Either the Reapers were inflicting massive damage throughout the galaxy or they were just in effect being a bit annoying by blowing up some easily-replaced facilities that we saw in-game, and killing (on a galactic scale) a compartively small number of people (i.e, in the single digit percent range of the overall population2). If all that destruction and death they did in the course of ME 3 did nothing more than inconvienance (on a galactic scale) the running of the galaxy for a couple of months, then they weren't really the threat they were made out to be in the narrative. Either it's serious or it isn't.
"Everything blew up because Art, but actually, everyone but Shepard and/or the Geth is really okay because handwave" is not even remotely good enough for me, especially when in flies in the face of previously the established data and even tone of the game.
I mean, really? They're gonna tell me "War is hell, and people die and stuff, but now it's over, everything is magically back to normal? Except you, player, because sacrifice is Art."
Don't think so.
2On Earth, specifically, 1.86 million per day, planet cleared in ten years, population of approx 7 billion (same as modern Earth), equals 0.00027%/day, so slightly under 1% per month (and under 10% for the "months" between invasion and ending it took to build the Crucible.) If the Protheans are any indication, it could take centuries to eliminate everyone, even without resistance.
(Have you gathered yet that I hate the ending on every level from conceptual to execution and every point in between...?)
1To be clear, whenever I use that phrase, I do mean it literally, as in one order of magnitude equals x10.
-
Re: Mass Effect 3.5B: Taste the Rainbow (Story and Ending Discussion; Spoilers!)
I concur. Some actual information about what happens to the people of the galaxy would have helped a great deal, but the ending itself would still have made no god-danged sense.
-
Re: Mass Effect 3.5B: Taste the Rainbow (Story and Ending Discussion; Spoilers!)
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Evrine
I don't, no. If you're saying that we're extrapolating based on how things currently are in the real world, I'd disagree to the extent that when or if we do so, it's only where the setting doesn't offer contradictions.
If you're trying to say something else, please clarify.
You're assuming, not extrapolating. A real extrapolation would account for the almost 200 years difference between our world and ME's on something as basic as disaster relief.
And here again is the attitude I'm referring to, where there is a gap in what the setting tells us, so we must assume the worst case scenario (that disaster relief hasn't advanced in nearly 2 centuries), because... why? Is it not just as possible that things like erecting shelters and repairing structures are in fact much easier in a civilization that has omnitools? I'd like to think so.
-
Re: Mass Effect 3.5B: Taste the Rainbow (Story and Ending Discussion; Spoilers!)
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Psyren
You're assuming, not extrapolating. A real extrapolation would account for the almost 200 years difference between our world and ME's on something as basic as disaster relief.
And here again is the attitude I'm referring to, where there is a gap in what the setting tells us, so we must assume the worst case scenario (that disaster relief hasn't advanced in nearly 2 centuries), because... why? Is it not just as possible that things like erecting shelters and repairing structures are in fact much easier in a civilization that has omnitools? I'd like to think so.
You might, but the evidence we've seen over the course of the games directly contradicts that. Feros, the refugees on the Citidel, the fact that starships aren't so easy to come by so that the Quarians treat them as worth their weight on gold, Omega and the rampant poverty seen in many places... None of those places seem like they had easy access to food or supplies, even before the Reaper attacks (and the first listed was a new colony, exactly where you would expect to see that sort of emergancy supply systems - and one has to say they were be better off in the aftermath of the Geth attack than they would be after a Reaper one.)
And it's exactly those places on the fringes, where life was hard before, that are going to get the short-shrift in the new environment.
The ME universe is neither Star Trek nor Star Wars - it is darker and somewhat harder sci-fi, which is why Bioware's abrupt denial of the damage caused by the relays is so grating.
-
Re: Mass Effect 3.5B: Taste the Rainbow (Story and Ending Discussion; Spoilers!)
The biggest issue I'm seeing right now is that the endings are so ambiguous that interpretation is inevitable. However, people seem to be preferring to make negative assumptions, but not positive ones, while neither is supported by what we've been shown. I'm guessing the terrible nature of the endings just left people in a bad state of mind when interpreting the results.
-
Re: Mass Effect 3.5B: Taste the Rainbow (Story and Ending Discussion; Spoilers!)
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Aotrs Commander
Basically, what he said.
Again.
(I'm beginning to think I should just let Evrine field all this stuff and confine myself to his cheerleading section...!)
heh, you're doing quite well yourself. I especially enjoyed your spoilered section and agree with your sentiments there.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Psyren
You're assuming, not extrapolating. A real extrapolation would account for the almost 200 years difference between our world and ME's on something as basic as disaster relief.
It's not a pure assumption, it's an extrapolation of what we know of the setting.
There is some evidence. It took the hanar 10 years to transport 375,000 drell off their homeworld. Domed, climate controlled cities had to be built for the drell, and even so, kepral's syndrome is still the leading cause of death for them. Now, the end of me3 isn't exactly analogous, but I think it suggests things will be difficult, even with most/all the races of the galaxy working together.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Psyren
And here again is the attitude I'm referring to, where there is a gap in what the setting tells us, so we must assume the worst case scenario (that disaster relief hasn't advanced in nearly 2 centuries), because... why? Is it not just as possible that things like erecting shelters and repairing structures are in fact much easier in a civilization that has omnitools? I'd like to think so.
Again, it's all possible, but having a few years (or more) of difficult recovery from a galactic scale war is hardly an implausible scenario.
People toss around the word apocalypse a lot, but apocalypse can mean a lot of different degrees of widespread destruction or disaster.
Also, what Aorts said.
-
Re: Mass Effect 3.5B: Taste the Rainbow (Story and Ending Discussion; Spoilers!)
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Psyren
You're assuming, not extrapolating. A real extrapolation would account for the almost 200 years difference between our world and ME's on something as basic as disaster relief.
It would also account for the scale of the disaster being orders of magnitude greater than any we have ever known.
Images of Earth in Mass Effect 3 show fires hundreds, if not thousands of square kilometres in area. There are literally areas the size of whole countries on fire.
The amount of ash and dust that would be kicked up are equivalent to supervolcano scenarios.
"disaster relief" for this kind of scenario is along the lines of "evacuate your remaining population and wait for the ice age to finish.
-
Re: Mass Effect 3.5B: Taste the Rainbow (Story and Ending Discussion; Spoilers!)
Okay, further follow up question because now I'm confused.
Are the people who think that a galaxy-wide disaster happened saying that
1. There must have been a galaxy-wide disaster of some scale (mass starvation and deprivation or worse) and any alternative is the authors lying to us about the setting
OR
2. Mass starvation etc. etc. is the most likely scenario, but it's possible that it didn't happen?
If you're going with 1, I think you're wrong, but if you're going with 2 then yeah sure it's probably at least equally likely as any other scenario even though I don't like it.
Edit: Another question I have. When people are talking about a galaxy-wide disaster, what kind of numbers does that look like? 50% of all sentients dying? 20%? 1%? Just for comparison, World War I led to the deaths of ~35 million people and the Spanish Flu from 1918-1920 claimed a further 100 million as its upper estimate (some possible overlap here, but we'll go with highest possible number). World population at the time was around 1.8 billion, so what was considered worldwide devastation and disease at the time killed off ~7.5% of the world population give or take.
-
Re: Mass Effect 3.5B: Taste the Rainbow (Story and Ending Discussion; Spoilers!)
Not to mention that disaster relief today can take advantage of resources from outside the devastated area. Whether we go by the 'decades and centuries' description of FTL, or '12 lightyears per day' figures, the victory fleet is limited to the resources available in the Sol system, because no one's going to be coming from Thessia or Palaven or anywhere else anytime soon.
@Anarion: We're saying a galactic dark age and the starvation of the fleet is the scenario that the endings imply, and that the justifications offered for why it didn't happen that have been proffered ring false to our ears, because they seem to contradict the established importance of the Mass Relays, among other things.
-
Re: Mass Effect 3.5B: Taste the Rainbow (Story and Ending Discussion; Spoilers!)
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Serenity
@Anarion: We're saying a galactic dark age and the starvation of the fleet is the scenario that the endings imply, and that the justifications offered for why it didn't happen that have been proffered ring false to our ears, because they seem to contradict the established importance of the Mass Relays, among other things.
Do you mean the justifications offered by those in this thread, or the justifications offered officially be Bioware? Or both? If those justifications are not acceptable, what would something look like that you or others would find convincing that a galactic dark age did not happen?
-
Re: Mass Effect 3.5B: Taste the Rainbow (Story and Ending Discussion; Spoilers!)
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Anarion
Okay, further follow up question because now I'm confused.
Are the people who think that a galaxy-wide disaster happened saying that
1. There must have been a galaxy-wide disaster of some scale (mass starvation and deprivation or worse) and any alternative is the authors lying to us about the setting
OR
2. Mass starvation etc. etc. is the most likely scenario, but it's possible that it didn't happen?
If you're going with 1, I think you're wrong, but if you're going with 2 then yeah sure it's probably at least equally likely as any other scenario even though I don't like it.
Edit: Another question I have. When people are talking about a galaxy-wide disaster, what kind of numbers does that look like? 50% of all sentients dying? 20%? 1%? Just for comparison, World War I led to the deaths of ~35 million people and the Spanish Flu from 1918-1920 claimed a further 100 million as its upper estimate (some possible overlap here, but we'll go with highest possible number). World population at the time was around 1.8 billion, so what was considered worldwide devastation and disease at the time killed off ~7.5% of the world population give or take.
I lean towards number 2. I don't see worlds like Eden Prime(depending on how many people were evacuated) dying out but the overall quality of life, the economic and military power, and overall status of "galactic civilization" declining. I think its more along the lines of 80-20 because so much has to go just right. And as I said earlier we're not looking at Mad Max in space type desolation but post Roman Europe 500-800 AD. The central power is gone, you see small kingdoms rising and falling, and overall quality of infrastructure and life is in sharp decline, the scale of armies and economies shrink etc.
-
Re: Mass Effect 3.5B: Taste the Rainbow (Story and Ending Discussion; Spoilers!)
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Derthric
I lean towards number 2. I don't see worlds like Eden Prime(depending on how many people were evacuated) dying out but the overall quality of life, the economic and military power, and overall status of "galactic civilization" declining. I think its more along the lines of 80-20 because so much has to go just right. And as I said earlier we're not looking at Mad Max in space type desolation but post Roman Europe 500-800 AD. The central power is gone, you see small kingdoms rising and falling, and overall quality of infrastructure and life is in sharp decline, the scale of armies and economies shrink etc.
The end of Rome is not a terribly apt comparison. For one thing, the peoples that invaded Rome were nomadic and unwilling to settle down or rebuild. They were also warlike and fought with each other as well as with the Romans, leading to large-scale tumult over an extended period of time. Literacy and education levels fell across the board and technologies that had existed were lost.
In comparison, nearly all scientists and experts are alive at the end of ME3 due to assignment to the crucible. Education and technologies are all available and the fleet itself has complete access to all planets and moons in the Sol system and very easy access to any other stars within 100 lights years or so. Even if mass relay technology were never reestablished and many people died during the initial cleanup after the fighting, all pieces are in place to establish a system-wide population at the same level of technology, albeit at a lower maximum carrying capacity than that available when the mass relays existed.
-
Re: Mass Effect 3.5B: Taste the Rainbow (Story and Ending Discussion; Spoilers!)
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Anarion
The end of Rome is not a terribly apt comparison. For one thing, the peoples that invaded Rome were nomadic and unwilling to settle down or rebuild. They were also warlike and fought with each other as well as with the Romans, leading to large-scale tumult over an extended period of time. Literacy and education levels fell across the board and technologies that had existed were lost.
In comparison, nearly all scientists and experts are alive at the end of ME3 due to assignment to the crucible. Education and technologies are all available and the fleet itself has complete access to all planets and moons in the Sol system and very easy access to any other stars within 100 lights years or so. Even if mass relay technology were never reestablished and many people died during the initial cleanup after the fighting, all pieces are in place to establish a system-wide population at the same level of technology, albeit at a lower maximum carrying capacity than that available when the mass relays existed.
And this leaves Earth and the area around it to become the next Byzantium, the remains of the old Empire in full-glory. But the best minds are there, not at Thessia, Palavan, Omega, Illium etc, which are all also burning embers. The other thing is I went with post roman Europe because of the slow decline in power and technology that lead to and followed the end of the empire. It may take a generation but earth can bounce back, its going to be a crummy generation though. However Illium on the far side of the galaxy cut off from the trade routes it had as its economic underpinnings and the poorer living conditions at its surface means its harsher rebuilding. Then think of Horizon having to become completely self-sufficient will have a much harder time than earth because the military and all the brightest minds are on the far side of the galaxy. The rebuilding and spread of Civilization will take more than a visit from a fast ship but a reformation of all space going vessels. And in the interim you will see new political systems arise in the cut off worlds colonies may squabble and fight over shared resources in neighboring systems triggering resource wars. The loss of stability of a central authority makes everything else a bigger struggle.