<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Mass Effect 3 Extended Cut</title>
	<atom:link href="http://gamedesignreviews.com/scrapbook/mass-effect-3-extended-cut/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://gamedesignreviews.com/scrapbook/mass-effect-3-extended-cut/</link>
	<description>Inductive Game Design Research</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Mon, 03 Nov 2014 07:08:02 +0100</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.2</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: Rhue</title>
		<link>http://gamedesignreviews.com/scrapbook/mass-effect-3-extended-cut/comment-page-1/#comment-119188</link>
		<dc:creator>Rhue</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 07 Dec 2012 10:24:07 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://gamedesignreviews.com/?p=7262#comment-119188</guid>
		<description>&quot;Harbinger is probably targeting according to priority&quot; 

If the normandy is so fast that it can fly out of a fight in space and onto the ground in like five seconds and so tough that it can survive several direct hits from a soverign class reaper, why didn&#039;t they just avoid the entire hammer thing and just have the normandy drop shepard and co. off at the beam?   The Normandy evac turns the whole earth section up till that point into nonsense.   Either the reapers are stupid for not blowing up the normandy, or the alliance is stupid for not using the normandy for that sooner and avoiding the massive losses they took getting to the beam in the first place.

&quot;Normandy crash is pointless; Not really, if you pick the destroy ending EDI will be pointedly absent from the cinematic(i.e., she died), the “point” is that regardless of ftl speed, nobody, not the alliance, not the council, not the geth and not even EDI will survive(possibly make the choice harder).&quot; 

It&#039;s pointless to have the normandy crash if it&#039;s just going to take off again.    They could have just as easily had the scene with a missing Edi in space or on earth and it would have had the same level of narrative significance.  If the point is just to show that nobody can outrun the... explosion(?), then the fact that we saw the entire galaxy map exploding and covering the galaxy in light makes that very same point in a far less nonsensical fashion.

&quot;Personally this has been my favourite choice from the start&quot;

No.  Synthesis makes no sense and you&#039;re bending what was shown into something different.    None of the claims you made were supported in the ending we got.   We were shown that all life and all sentient robots started glowing green and had circuit board patterns.  That&#039;s IT.   Everything else you said was completely made up by you.     It was never mentioned that robots would be able to connect to the &quot;digital half&quot; of organic life.  It was never explained what the digital part of biological life did or what it represented or how it would affect anything other than by letting the quarians take their helmets off.    Are the plants part synthetic now?  What does that mean for the plants?   We get no explanation of any kind about what synthesis does or why it&#039;s good other than the fact that somehow it will stop the reapers without killing the geth.    It&#039;s TERRIBLE from a narrative perspective because it offers a simple solution with no drawbacks where everyone is happy forever for reasons that make no sense.    Why WOULDN&#039;T everyone choose synthesis?  It&#039;s too easy.

Here are some other reasons synthesis makes no sense.   So Shepard adds her &quot;energy&quot; to the beam.   What kind of energy?  Kinetic?  Heat?  Strong or weak nuclear force?   Is it her DNA?   DNA isn&#039;t energy.   Is it DNA converted into energy?   How does that translate to glowing circuit krogans?   Do non-sentient computers like VIs now have biological components?  What do those biological components in synthetics even do?    What&#039;s to stop these new cyborg people from creating even better cyborgs and starting the nonsensical conflict that made the reapers necessary in the first place?    Also, if synthesis was  a good solution, why didn&#039;t the reapers do it earlier?   If the crucible is just a giant battery, isn&#039;t it something the reapers could have created themselves?  Why not just synthesize everyone and avoid the whole reaper thing in the first place?   This line of reasoning goes on for miles because NOTHING was explained or shown in the ending we got. 


&quot;Also, your incredulity about the reaper’s restraint in the face of these new developments proves you didn’t really get what the reapers were all about in the first place&quot;

Could you be more arrogant and insulting with the way you phrase that?  I don&#039;t think it&#039;s quite patronizing enough.

&quot;they’re big picture orientated, incorporate/”harvest” advanced life in the interests of expansion opportunities for primitive life, nothing is actually lost, it just exists in reaper form against its will&quot;

What about the races that they can&#039;t turn into reapers?  We&#039;re specifically told that the quarians aren&#039;t suitable(it&#039;s a pun!) to be turned into reapers because of their weak immune system.   If reapers were storing all sentient life like some kind of library, they would actually harvest everyone, but they clearly aren&#039;t doing that.   They also wouldn&#039;t be stomping around blowing up buildings and lasering everyone, they&#039;d knock out military strongholds and then start reapering, but again, that&#039;s not what we see.     In fact, humans seem like the only species out of all sentient life in the galaxy that the reapers were interested in &quot;preserving&quot;.

Furthermore, how does it make any sense to preserve a species by turning them into paste and then siphoning them into a giant terminator?   What does that accomplish?   Also, why aren&#039;t they doing that in ME3?   What&#039;s the deal with the hallways of scattered corpses being poked by one of those bug worker guys on the citadel?  Why is it so different from what the collectors were doing?

Synthesis is a bad ending because it introduces a bunch of new concepts all at once  right at the end and doesn&#039;t explain any of them at all.   The only way you could see it as a fully fleshed out ending is if you sat there headcanoning for a long time afterwards and made up a completely different ending like you clearly did.

The reapers make no sense and every detail we get about them is contradicted by a different detail.    Synthesis makes no sense and all we get is a bunch of cryptic imagery and we&#039;re left with a pat on the head.   You can be satisfied with that if you want but don&#039;t go telling people that they didn&#039;t &quot;get&quot; it if they didn&#039;t get it, because there was nothing there to get.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>&#8220;Harbinger is probably targeting according to priority&#8221; </p>
<p>If the normandy is so fast that it can fly out of a fight in space and onto the ground in like five seconds and so tough that it can survive several direct hits from a soverign class reaper, why didn&#8217;t they just avoid the entire hammer thing and just have the normandy drop shepard and co. off at the beam?   The Normandy evac turns the whole earth section up till that point into nonsense.   Either the reapers are stupid for not blowing up the normandy, or the alliance is stupid for not using the normandy for that sooner and avoiding the massive losses they took getting to the beam in the first place.</p>
<p>&#8220;Normandy crash is pointless; Not really, if you pick the destroy ending EDI will be pointedly absent from the cinematic(i.e., she died), the “point” is that regardless of ftl speed, nobody, not the alliance, not the council, not the geth and not even EDI will survive(possibly make the choice harder).&#8221; </p>
<p>It&#8217;s pointless to have the normandy crash if it&#8217;s just going to take off again.    They could have just as easily had the scene with a missing Edi in space or on earth and it would have had the same level of narrative significance.  If the point is just to show that nobody can outrun the&#8230; explosion(?), then the fact that we saw the entire galaxy map exploding and covering the galaxy in light makes that very same point in a far less nonsensical fashion.</p>
<p>&#8220;Personally this has been my favourite choice from the start&#8221;</p>
<p>No.  Synthesis makes no sense and you&#8217;re bending what was shown into something different.    None of the claims you made were supported in the ending we got.   We were shown that all life and all sentient robots started glowing green and had circuit board patterns.  That&#8217;s IT.   Everything else you said was completely made up by you.     It was never mentioned that robots would be able to connect to the &#8220;digital half&#8221; of organic life.  It was never explained what the digital part of biological life did or what it represented or how it would affect anything other than by letting the quarians take their helmets off.    Are the plants part synthetic now?  What does that mean for the plants?   We get no explanation of any kind about what synthesis does or why it&#8217;s good other than the fact that somehow it will stop the reapers without killing the geth.    It&#8217;s TERRIBLE from a narrative perspective because it offers a simple solution with no drawbacks where everyone is happy forever for reasons that make no sense.    Why WOULDN&#8217;T everyone choose synthesis?  It&#8217;s too easy.</p>
<p>Here are some other reasons synthesis makes no sense.   So Shepard adds her &#8220;energy&#8221; to the beam.   What kind of energy?  Kinetic?  Heat?  Strong or weak nuclear force?   Is it her DNA?   DNA isn&#8217;t energy.   Is it DNA converted into energy?   How does that translate to glowing circuit krogans?   Do non-sentient computers like VIs now have biological components?  What do those biological components in synthetics even do?    What&#8217;s to stop these new cyborg people from creating even better cyborgs and starting the nonsensical conflict that made the reapers necessary in the first place?    Also, if synthesis was  a good solution, why didn&#8217;t the reapers do it earlier?   If the crucible is just a giant battery, isn&#8217;t it something the reapers could have created themselves?  Why not just synthesize everyone and avoid the whole reaper thing in the first place?   This line of reasoning goes on for miles because NOTHING was explained or shown in the ending we got. </p>
<p>&#8220;Also, your incredulity about the reaper’s restraint in the face of these new developments proves you didn’t really get what the reapers were all about in the first place&#8221;</p>
<p>Could you be more arrogant and insulting with the way you phrase that?  I don&#8217;t think it&#8217;s quite patronizing enough.</p>
<p>&#8220;they’re big picture orientated, incorporate/”harvest” advanced life in the interests of expansion opportunities for primitive life, nothing is actually lost, it just exists in reaper form against its will&#8221;</p>
<p>What about the races that they can&#8217;t turn into reapers?  We&#8217;re specifically told that the quarians aren&#8217;t suitable(it&#8217;s a pun!) to be turned into reapers because of their weak immune system.   If reapers were storing all sentient life like some kind of library, they would actually harvest everyone, but they clearly aren&#8217;t doing that.   They also wouldn&#8217;t be stomping around blowing up buildings and lasering everyone, they&#8217;d knock out military strongholds and then start reapering, but again, that&#8217;s not what we see.     In fact, humans seem like the only species out of all sentient life in the galaxy that the reapers were interested in &#8220;preserving&#8221;.</p>
<p>Furthermore, how does it make any sense to preserve a species by turning them into paste and then siphoning them into a giant terminator?   What does that accomplish?   Also, why aren&#8217;t they doing that in ME3?   What&#8217;s the deal with the hallways of scattered corpses being poked by one of those bug worker guys on the citadel?  Why is it so different from what the collectors were doing?</p>
<p>Synthesis is a bad ending because it introduces a bunch of new concepts all at once  right at the end and doesn&#8217;t explain any of them at all.   The only way you could see it as a fully fleshed out ending is if you sat there headcanoning for a long time afterwards and made up a completely different ending like you clearly did.</p>
<p>The reapers make no sense and every detail we get about them is contradicted by a different detail.    Synthesis makes no sense and all we get is a bunch of cryptic imagery and we&#8217;re left with a pat on the head.   You can be satisfied with that if you want but don&#8217;t go telling people that they didn&#8217;t &#8220;get&#8221; it if they didn&#8217;t get it, because there was nothing there to get.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: blah</title>
		<link>http://gamedesignreviews.com/scrapbook/mass-effect-3-extended-cut/comment-page-1/#comment-74936</link>
		<dc:creator>blah</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 03 Jul 2012 16:14:26 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://gamedesignreviews.com/?p=7262#comment-74936</guid>
		<description>oh come on, man, if you&#039;re having trouble keeping up at this point you might as well give up.

Evac is silly; Harbinger is probably targeting according to priority, i.e., what&#039;s closer to the beam, Harbinger could try to shoot down the Normandy but then it might be a wasted shot(which they evidently have to recharge) as the Normandy is a brick(assuming you actually updated the hull, weaponry and shield in me2) when there are a whole bunch of other targets more easily wiped out that are actually closing in on the beam thereby representing a larger threat. If it really was as simple as firing the main gun to win then why didn&#039;t Harbinger fly off and cruch Hackett&#039;s ship or shoot it&#039;s way through the paper mache fleet and fry the crucible on the spot?

Normandy crash is pointless; Not really, if you pick the destroy ending EDI will be pointedly absent from the cinematic(i.e., she died), the &quot;point&quot; is that regardless of ftl speed, nobody, not the alliance, not the council, not the geth and not even EDI will survive(possibly make the choice harder).

Synthesis makes no sense; Personally this has been my favourite choice from the start(a; I actually like the idea of becoming partially digital, b; destroy = lose reaper tech and control just gives you the bare-bones benefits, c; the indoctrination theory was blatant wishful albeit not entirely illogical, thinking from the fans). I don&#039;t see what&#039;s throwing you really? Everybody gets a digital component(technology DOESN&#039;T replace organic aspects of an individual). &quot;Robots are partially not robots anymore?&quot; not sure how you got there but obviously robots are still robots, they can just connect to the digital half of all organics including plants. Also, your incredulity about the reaper&#039;s restraint in the face of these new developments proves you didn&#039;t really get what the reapers were all about in the first place(they&#039;re big picture orientated, incorporate/&quot;harvest&quot; advanced life in the interests of expansion opportunities for primitive life, nothing is actually lost, it just exists in reaper form against its will). Put it this way, the new DNA doesn&#039;t override or remove older parts(not to be confused with junk DNA), this is obvious inasmuch as trees, Krogan humans etc are all physically and behaviourally distinct/retain individualism from one another, it just means there&#039;s a new bit they all have in common that manifests as circuitry and probably a remote extranet connect and shit like that. Plus, synthesis = you become the heirs of a massive legacy of civilizations, what dumbarse wouldn&#039;t choose synthesis? compared to it, control is like a nibble of the cake and destroy is mashing your mate&#039;s head into it until he suffocates and refuse does nothing.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>oh come on, man, if you&#8217;re having trouble keeping up at this point you might as well give up.</p>
<p>Evac is silly; Harbinger is probably targeting according to priority, i.e., what&#8217;s closer to the beam, Harbinger could try to shoot down the Normandy but then it might be a wasted shot(which they evidently have to recharge) as the Normandy is a brick(assuming you actually updated the hull, weaponry and shield in me2) when there are a whole bunch of other targets more easily wiped out that are actually closing in on the beam thereby representing a larger threat. If it really was as simple as firing the main gun to win then why didn&#8217;t Harbinger fly off and cruch Hackett&#8217;s ship or shoot it&#8217;s way through the paper mache fleet and fry the crucible on the spot?</p>
<p>Normandy crash is pointless; Not really, if you pick the destroy ending EDI will be pointedly absent from the cinematic(i.e., she died), the &#8220;point&#8221; is that regardless of ftl speed, nobody, not the alliance, not the council, not the geth and not even EDI will survive(possibly make the choice harder).</p>
<p>Synthesis makes no sense; Personally this has been my favourite choice from the start(a; I actually like the idea of becoming partially digital, b; destroy = lose reaper tech and control just gives you the bare-bones benefits, c; the indoctrination theory was blatant wishful albeit not entirely illogical, thinking from the fans). I don&#8217;t see what&#8217;s throwing you really? Everybody gets a digital component(technology DOESN&#8217;T replace organic aspects of an individual). &#8220;Robots are partially not robots anymore?&#8221; not sure how you got there but obviously robots are still robots, they can just connect to the digital half of all organics including plants. Also, your incredulity about the reaper&#8217;s restraint in the face of these new developments proves you didn&#8217;t really get what the reapers were all about in the first place(they&#8217;re big picture orientated, incorporate/&#8221;harvest&#8221; advanced life in the interests of expansion opportunities for primitive life, nothing is actually lost, it just exists in reaper form against its will). Put it this way, the new DNA doesn&#8217;t override or remove older parts(not to be confused with junk DNA), this is obvious inasmuch as trees, Krogan humans etc are all physically and behaviourally distinct/retain individualism from one another, it just means there&#8217;s a new bit they all have in common that manifests as circuitry and probably a remote extranet connect and shit like that. Plus, synthesis = you become the heirs of a massive legacy of civilizations, what dumbarse wouldn&#8217;t choose synthesis? compared to it, control is like a nibble of the cake and destroy is mashing your mate&#8217;s head into it until he suffocates and refuse does nothing.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
