Biggest plot holes in games

[bug_of_war]

Mass effect 3..from the start.. after all the advantaged we have amassed & learnt from ME1 about the reapers, we still need a contrived macguffin/deus ex machina (depending on how you look at it)
advantages include:
2000 year delay allowing everyone to advance
reverse engineered sovereign weapons
control of relays
control of citadel
no surprise attack (they somehow managed to make ME3 a kind of surprise attack anyway)
More diverse aliens thanks to prothean intervention (protheans downfall was lack of diversity)



Dishonoured..not a plot hole but limited mechanic

how is me killing people increasing rats significantly?i'm just one man and the city is full of crime and authorities killing casually. Does my killing make that much of a difference?
Increased guards and rats (if we must keep the rats) should be 2 different mechanics..especially since i can kill someone and make them explode into dust. or kill weepers that rats don't feed on and authorities wouldn't care about.
Weird mechanic

Um, about the ME3 thing you're talking about (I'm assuming the crucible is what you're refering to as the macguffin/DEM), it isn't a macguffin. Macguffins are objects/things that drive the plot of the story, but have no real overall effect on the plot. The Crucible can seem to be a macguffin, but the fact that you use it in the end cancels it out. Similar reasoning goes for the Deus Ex Machina idea, the fact that the crucible is introduced at the start of the game, we are told that it will stop the Reapers somehow, and that technically the space child IS the crucible/citadel hybrid, it negates the idea that it is a Deus Ex Machina.

I'm also confused where you're getting the idea that the present cycles species had 2000 years to prepare for the Reapers. Would you be able to explain to me a little more what you meant by that? As for the reverse engineering of Soverign's weapons, the game made it clear that most of the debris was lost, stolen, destroyed or simply thrown away due to The Illusive Man, the Council being complete idiots, and random scavengers. We also know that even dead Reapers can still influence and indoctrinate organics so there really wasn't anyway to reverse engineer the highly advanced weapons. Your other points are quite reasonable though, as it is wierd how huge squid robots somehow just have super fast engines etc etc.

I agree with you about Dishonoured, it's so annoying that killing a few guards and your target increases the population of rats and those infected people. Also, another thing that bugged me about Dishonoured is the fact that EVERYONE treats you like a horrible person for killing people who were going to kill you due to their own schemes. When the tagline of the game is "REVENGE SOLVES EVERYTHING", I don't expect the game to turn around and call me a dick for taking revenge the good old fashion way of just up and murdering the bastards. I mean honestly, it's wierd that I'm considered a saint for [spoilers] Branding a guys face making him forever unable to communicate with anyone which eventually leads to him catching a horrific plague, cutting two brother's tongues out and shaving them to then proceed to make them live the rest of the days as unpaid slave miners [/spoilers] But I kill a guy by shooting him in the face and all of a sudden I'm an evil untrustworthy assassin working for a tyrant queen. STUFF YOU DISHONOURED!

 

[IronMit]

Um, about the ME3 thing you're talking about (I'm assuming the crucible is what you're refering to as the macguffin/DEM), it isn't a macguffin. Macguffins are objects/things that drive the plot of the story, but have no real overall effect on the plot. The Crucible can seem to be a macguffin, but the fact that you use it in the end cancels it out. Similar reasoning goes for the Deus Ex Machina idea, the fact that the crucible is introduced at the start of the game, we are told that it will stop the Reapers somehow, and that technically the space child IS the crucible/citadel hybrid, it negates the idea that it is a Deus Ex Machina.

I'm also confused where you're getting the idea that the present cycles species had 2000 years to prepare for the Reapers. Would you be able to explain to me a little more what you meant by that? As for the reverse engineering of Soverign's weapons, the game made it clear that most of the debris was lost, stolen, destroyed or simply thrown away due to The Illusive Man, the Council being complete idiots, and random scavengers. We also know that even dead Reapers can still influence and indoctrinate organics so there really wasn't anyway to reverse engineer the highly advanced weapons. Your other points are quite reasonable though, as it is wierd how huge squid robots somehow just have super fast engines etc etc.

hmmm the plot did revolve around the crucible... though it was actually part of the story..not sure if it means it cancels it out but I see your point.
Deus ex machina is also down to interpretation...it was introduced at the start of ME3 but one could still interpret it as something not hinted at or forshadowed that came up at the 3rd act of the trilogy. An example would be if a new technology or material of interest not hinted at appeared in the 3rd movie of back to the future or in the return of the jedi- Like if there was no deathstar or mention of a deathstar in 'A new hope' but at the start of 'return of the jedi' someone said.. 'we got to stop the deathstar, they are making one you know!'. Maybe it doesn't fall under macguffin or deus ex machina but there would be a very poor story telling element there. i don't know what it would be defined as? contrived? maybe that's too strong a word

2000 years because that's when the rachni wars were.
The rachni queen said they were influenced by the reapers, hence went to war.
Sovereign was coincidently flying around trying to figure out how to open the citadel relay
So he either just started a war for fun or common sense dictates he was trying to open the relay after Plan A failed. (This isn't my theory I just made up, it's mainstream from all the quotes and fully accepted on BSN)

The codex states thianx cannons were made by reverse engineering sovereign parts.
The 'random scavengers' story element was just made to justify the council and most other people still not taking the reaper threat seriously..(or shepard would just tell Illusive man to get stuffed and rejoin the Alliance)..fair enough.

The BSN forums were rife with threads asking why they spent all those resources on a crucible device they were unsure about, when they could of equipped everything with thianx cannons. This feeds into the annoyance the reapers were made extra powerful to justify the crucible so they could ignore the lore


I forgot to add there is also a whole new race (humans) and possibly the geth army for the reapers to contend against.
The krogan appeared during the rachni wars...salarians lifted them up from their relatively primitive state to fight.

So to these advantages against the reapers:

2000 year delay allowing everyone to advance
reverse engineered sovereign weapons (thianx cannons)
control of relays
control of citadel
no surprise attack (even though they still somehow managed to make ME3 a kind of surprise attack anyway)

add 3 new powerful races to contend with -humans, krogan, possibly geth -that can change sides(and these aren't crappy ones like volous and hanar)

I'm not saying the reapers would be a walkover ....but the 'there's no way to win conventionally' line Hackket keeps brainwashing you with, whilst purposely never mentioning any of the major advantages I listed above was so so poor

The explanation of Hackett getting his arse kicked in minutes and running away to regroup whilst the Turian's were holding out throughout 2/3's of the game was also laughable, even if they were losing very very slowly

 

[bug_of_war]

hmmm the plot did revolve around the crucible... though it was actually part of the story..not sure if it means it cancels it out but I see your point.
Deus ex machina is also down to interpretation...it was introduced at the start of ME3 but one could still interpret it as something not hinted at or forshadowed that came up at the 3rd act of the trilogy. An example would be if a new technology or material of interest not hinted at appeared in the 3rd movie of back to the future or in the return of the jedi- Like if there was no deathstar or mention of a deathstar in 'A new hope' but at the start of 'return of the jedi' someone said.. 'we got to stop the deathstar, they are making one you know!'. Maybe it doesn't fall under macguffin or deus ex machina but there would be a very poor story telling element there. i don't know what it would be defined as? contrived? maybe that's too strong a word

2000 years because that's when the rachni wars were.
The rachni queen said they were influenced by the reapers, hence went to war.
Sovereign was coincidently flying around trying to figure out how to open the citadel relay
So he either just started a war for fun or common sense dictates he was trying to open the relay after Plan A failed. (This isn't my theory I just made up, it's mainstream from all the quotes and fully accepted on BSN)

The codex states thianx cannons were made by reverse engineering sovereign parts.
The 'random scavengers' story element was just made to justify the council and most other people still not taking the reaper threat seriously..(or shepard would just tell Illusive man to get stuffed and rejoin the Alliance)..fair enough.

The BSN forums were rife with threads asking why they spent all those resources on a crucible device they were unsure about, when they could of equipped everything with thianx cannons. This feeds into the annoyance the reapers were made extra powerful to justify the crucible so they could ignore the lore


I forgot to add there is also a whole new race (humans) and possibly the geth army for the reapers to contend against.
The krogan appeared during the rachni wars...salarians lifted them up from their relatively primitive state to fight.

So to these advantages against the reapers:

2000 year delay allowing everyone to advance
reverse engineered sovereign weapons (thianx cannons)
control of relays
control of citadel
no surprise attack (even though they still somehow managed to make ME3 a kind of surprise attack anyway)

add 3 new powerful races to contend with -humans, krogan, possibly geth -that can change sides(and these aren't crappy ones like volous and hanar)

Cool, thanks for explaining that to me. I think contrived is the right word for it, and I can see how as ME3 was technically the third act, it can be seen as being introduced too late into the series. I still however feel that the story was pretty tight in terms of the Reapers not being considered a threat. As far as I am aware, other than the Rachnai, little to no other organics knew of Soverign's patrolling around the galaxy, and even if they did, it is likely that they would not be listened to as the majority of the sentient organics were engaged in a war and would likely dismiss the idea of a giant un manned ship with the ability to indoctrinate species to bend to their will. As far as the Asari, Turian and Salarians are aware, the Rachnai are just a savage race of spiders threatening their existence.

I do find it intereting about the Thanix Cannons not being implemented (after what you've just told me), but I again feel as though the story did not fumble as much as it could have as A) The galaxy is being purged of all space race organics. B) The previous battle with against Soverign may have made some believe that even with the upgraded weapons the Reapers would still be tough. and C) After 3 years of Shepard constantly prooving to the galaxy he was right, they decide to follow his instincts as they appear to be correct a majority of the time. While this is still somewhat weak, I believe it is more likely for a galaxy being exterminated to put all faith into a seemingly improbable method due to the knowledge that previous cycle races believed it would work, and that you have the background knowledge that ALL the previous cycles failed due to their attempts at conventional fighting (this is very apparent with Javik).

There are clearly holes in most ideas and opinions on the Mass Effect series, some being easier to believe while others not so much. My main annoyance with most of the fans is their willingness to accept the way Asari's breed, how Reapers indoctrinate species, and that EVERY species has a translator inbuilt into their brain or something (that doesn't translate every word, eg Keelah sal I (I think that's how it's spelt)) yet when it came to the distribution of the Crucible's power everyone suddenly found it too hard to believe.

 

[M-E-D The Poet]

Guys? Guys, look up what a plot hole is, then post.

It's not "characters made a decision that seems dumb or weird" and it's not "something that could have been explained but was left vague". Things that are not plot holes include:

In The Walking Dead

Spoiler

... if you choose not to loot the car, the owner still stalks and kidnaps Clem to punish Lee despite Kenny having a kid and never even questioning whether to steal the food.

That's not a plot hole, it's a convenient characterization inconsistency. If the crazy guy decides to go after Lee, that's what he does, regardless of whether it makes the most sense, it's not logically impossible for it to happen.

Or in Arkham City

Spoiler

Strange threatening to reveal Batman's identity if he doesn't play along but never doing so despite being aware of his escape. Again, that's just something inconsistent the character chooses to do, not a logical impossibility.

Sheesh.

Real plot holes in games off the top of my head? Hm. Let's see... I'm coming up empty. I guess games tend to have simple plots, so it's relatively easy to keep them straight. There must be some, though...

I think real plotholes in games usually come down to : I've had the means the opportunity the intent to kill this bloke but I never do and then whine about how he's killing whatever he's killing even though I had the means to stop him all along.

Because in the end it then comes down to "am I prepared for the big fight" and some games allow you to be prepared for it ages before you actually get there but never allow you to finish it off.

Nope, that is exactly what a plot hole is NOT. By that token, all of Batman's relationship with the Joker is a plot hole. Again, a character choosing to do or not do something is not a plot hole unless this is based on information he shouldn't have or otherwise made impossible by the rules of the fiction. That's not even inconsistent characterization, even, that's just nerdy nitpicking, actively refusing to engage in suspension of disbelief and pointing out elements that are genre or media conventions as "plot holes".

Other things falling in that category: it's not a plot hole that Mario gets to fall to his death multiple times despite not being established to be immortal, it's not a plot hole that Link can take items from people's houses without being seen as a thief, it's not a plot hole that Nathan Drake and other game heroes get shot all the time, but if shot in a cutscene they die or are critically injured, it's not a plot hole that Final Fantasy characters can punch a tank to death and it's certainly not a plot hole that characters in games are shown in gameplay to be powerful enough to do something that they don't do, whether they complain about it or not.

What all of those are is bad College Humor sketches.

No I literally mean that you walk in a room with A tricked out Assault rifle after having shot 2000 guys on your way into that room and you get a cutscene you get hit once in the cutscene and then after the cutscene you only have a pistol for example (this happens a lot in farcry 3 for example)

Or do you not see how there is a massive hole in the situation where I walk in a room with a assault rifle, stay in that room and don't change anything and walk out the room with a pistol ?

 

[M-E-D The Poet]

I think real plotholes in games usually come down to : I've had the means the opportunity the intent to kill this bloke but I never do and then whine about how he's killing whatever he's killing even though I had the means to stop him all along.

Because in the end it then comes down to "am I prepared for the big fight" and some games allow you to be prepared for it ages before you actually get there but never allow you to finish it off.

Nope, that is exactly what a plot hole is NOT. By that token, all of Batman's relationship with the Joker is a plot hole. Again, a character choosing to do or not do something is not a plot hole unless this is based on information he shouldn't have or otherwise made impossible by the rules of the fiction. That's not even inconsistent characterization, even, that's just nerdy nitpicking, actively refusing to engage in suspension of disbelief and pointing out elements that are genre or media conventions as "plot holes".

Other things falling in that category: it's not a plot hole that Mario gets to fall to his death multiple times despite not being established to be immortal, it's not a plot hole that Link can take items from people's houses without being seen as a thief, it's not a plot hole that Nathan Drake and other game heroes get shot all the time, but if shot in a cutscene they die or are critically injured, it's not a plot hole that Final Fantasy characters can punch a tank to death and it's certainly not a plot hole that characters in games are shown in gameplay to be powerful enough to do something that they don't do, whether they complain about it or not.

What all of those are is bad College Humor sketches.

No I literally mean that you walk in a room with A tricked out Assault rifle after having shot 2000 guys on your way into that room and you get a cutscene you get hit once in the cutscene and then after the cutscene you only have a pistol for example (this happens a lot in farcry 3 for example)

Or do you not see how there is a massive hole in the situation where I walk in a room with a assault rifle, stay in that room and don't change anything and walk out the room with a pistol ?

Hm, that's not quite what you described the first time, but never mind.

No, it's still not a plot hole. First off, it has nothing to do with the plot, it's related to a gameplay mechanic (i.e. your weapon management mechanic), so already it couldn't possibly be a plot hole. Second, because it's a gameplay thing, it's part of the nitpicky refusal to suspend disbelief I was talking about earlier. The devs didn't code for every weapon combo in the cutscene, so you're stuck with whatever they could design for. Some games put resources on that little nod to consistency, some don't, but that doesn't mean the ones that don't are telling their story in a worse way or that the logic of the plot is damaged because the GUN is not part of the PLOT. See my point?

I mean, if you're not willing to suspend disbelief for that stuff, how you do make it through your average platformer or brawler? How did all of those turkeys get lodged in walls and garbage bins in Castlevania or Streets of Rage? That's the same stupid train of thought you see in Cracked articles pointing out how nobody locks their cars, struggles to find a parking spot or goes to the bathroom in movies.

no you're dead wrong, it is a plot hole when that weapon would have solved the situation easily.

I think you yourself should have another look at plotholes, what I'm pointing out is a typical contradiction in setting/within the rules of the world.

 

[IronMit]

I still however feel that the story was pretty tight in terms of the Reapers not being considered a threat. As far as I am aware, other than the Rachnai, little to no other organics knew of Soverign's patrolling around the galaxy, and even if they did, it is likely that they would not be listened to as the majority of the sentient organics were engaged in a war and would likely dismiss the idea of a giant un manned ship with the ability to indoctrinate species to bend to their will. As far as the Asari, Turian and Salarians are aware, the Rachnai are just a savage race of spiders threatening their existence.

Just to clarify...
The advantages I listed (eg. the massive tactical advantage the reapers lost) actually has nothing to do with how aware people were of the truth behind the rachni or the reapers, or considering them a threat;

2000 year delay allowing everyone to advance
reverse engineered sovereign weapons (thianx cannons)
control of relays
control of citadel
no surprise attack via centre of relay network (even though they still somehow managed to make ME3 a kind of surprise attack anyway)
3 new powerful races to contend with -humans, krogan, possibly geth
The Quarians also have the biggest baddass fleet which they only made about 1800 years after the rachni war,('cos that's when the geth chased them off their planet)

It seems the galaxy has almost tripled in strength, and the reapers have lost their surprise citadel relay attack (the one the prothean VI on Ilos highlighted and said was their undoing)

The reapers wanted to attack 2000 years ago (or maybe much earlier) because it was a good balance between the civilisations being advanced enough to be worth culling and not too difficult to fight even with their surprise citadel tactic.
They have lost so many advantages in so many area's even if 99.9999% of the galaxy weren't preparing. The only point in my list that involves preparing is the mass production of thianx cannons.

This is where we can interpret in different ways. I think we are 2x/3x more powerful (+ citadel tactic stopped- the prothean legacy that makes us the first cycle that has a chance is a cool thought) means we had a chance to fight the reapers (if shepard unites the galaxy) Other's think the crucible is still necessary

I think in the codex it tells you the translator is built into omnitool type devices. When a new species is found they are integrated into the translation devices. They go into in mass effect 1 when they talk about the extranet and the hanar speak by some sort of illuminious lights that the translator changes into audio dialogue but you see them flash anyway .

 

[Joseph Harrison]

snip

Except you're wrong, that wasn't the first time they spoke (which is pretty obvious by the familiarity with which they speak) James has been guarding Shepard for the past six months while Shepard was in lock down. Also is it really hard to believe that in the six months between ME2 and ME3 that Anderson was promoted once or twice seeing as how he was one of the highest decorated officers in the whole alliance and a close friend with Admiral Hackett and Councilor Udina.

snip

snip

I always figured it was due to Shepard's Spectre seniority. Kaiden may be the higher rank in the Human military, but Shepard was a higher Spectre rank, and as Spectre rank trumps Alliance rank, Shepard was in command.

I also think it has to do with the fact that Shepard is a part of the army and Kaiden the Marines so because Shepard is in charge of the Normandy and Kaidan is "stationed" on the Normandy then Shepard is in charge of him.

Reapers in ME3. They collect people to make more reapers. But as soon as they land they say 'Fuck THAT!' and just stomp around and fire lasers at BUILDINGS. No nanotech, biotech weapons whatsoever. Destroying all civilization in the universe. By stepping on their buildings and firing lasers at them.

Not as big as the the catalyst's logic though, ofcourse.

A double whammy completely knocking the reaper's villain status and credibility out of the park.

That was just for the starting of the invasion where they were taking out infrastructure and the Alliance military. If you listen to the dialogue they talk about how the Reapers are in fact taking people to be "harvested" they just have no qualms with killing lots of people if that's necessary.

 

[Orange12345]

Assassin's creed 2 ending, why the hell did Ezio not kill Rodrigo? I know they wanted to keep his death in line with history but seriously they could have just made him drop the staff and escape instead of having Ezio STANDING over him and just decide not to kill the sob

 

[Tomeran]

The "Russian can invade all of Europe at the same time"-move in the CoD series comes to mind. Particularly entertaining since the ruskies were just beaten back from American soil shortly before this attack.

But that one's probably been bashed to death.

There's the ME3 space magic ending, but if im gonna avoid subjects that's been talked to death I shouldnt touch that with a 100 foot pole.


Oh hell I dono, there are so many plot holes in the gaming industry to pick from.

 

[Evil Top Hat]

Not so much a plot hole, but in FarCry3

Spoiler

during the hallucinogenic sequence where you have to kill Hoyt,

what the hell happened to all the guards?

It just irked me a little. Not enough to be an "oh my god this game sucks because it missed a few details" moment (not like I have those, anyway), but still, what the hell?

I've heard people complaining about that section, but I was more baffled by

Spoiler

when you kill Vaas, and you enter that dream/drug sequence and fend off illusions of him before finally shooting him and leaving safe and victorious, despite the fact that HE FUCKING STABBED YOU. Seriously. HE STABBED YOU. Not once does the game explain how you managed to defeat Vaas or even get out of that pirate camp with a bloody knife rammed through all your vital organs. Oh yeah, and there was also that point in which you were in a helicopter that got shot out of the sky by a rocket, exploded, and crash landed, and what happens? Yep. You survive. Oh yeah, then a few moments after Vaas shoots you in the chest again before burying you under a pile of corpses. And you survive.

The only solution to the glaringly improbable story of Far Cry 3 is that he is somehow deranged, drugged up, or biased in some way that explains how he gets out of so many numerous fatal situations during cutscenes.

 

[Mikeyfell]

snip

Except you're wrong, that wasn't the first time they spoke (which is pretty obvious by the familiarity with which they speak) James has been guarding Shepard for the past six months while Shepard was in lock down. Also is it really hard to believe that in the six months between ME2 and ME3 that Anderson was promoted once or twice seeing as how he was one of the highest decorated officers in the whole alliance and a close friend with Admiral Hackett and Councilor Udina.

So you're arguing that that was stated in dialog isn't a plot hole because of something that was never stated in dialog... Seems legit.
You know James also said Cerberus was working with the Collectors during the events of Mass Effect 2. So I wouldn't cut James any slack

But I still have a problem with the Anderson thing. see in about 50% of games (Probably more) Anderson left the Alliance and there never was a "Councilor Udina"
I was under the impression that the Mass Effect games were supposed to adapt to the choices you made and not just retcon them to suit their lazy dipshit writers. So I'm going to continue to count that as a plot hole right along with if you picked Udina at the end of ME 1 (And killed the council) there are still aliens in the council even though Udina says very pointedly "Forge a new council composed of a single voice, humanity." So I'm pretty content to write Mass Effect 3 off as a plot hole ridden non-cannon mess

snip

snip

I always figured it was due to Shepard's Spectre seniority. Kaiden may be the higher rank in the Human military, but Shepard was a higher Spectre rank, and as Spectre rank trumps Alliance rank, Shepard was in command.

I also think it has to do with the fact that Shepard is a part of the army and Kaiden the Marines so because Shepard is in charge of the Normandy and Kaidan is "stationed" on the Normandy then Shepard is in charge of him.

A Major in the Marines is lower rank than a Commander in the navy.
I thought that was a plot hole as well, but it turns out not.

 

[Joseph Harrison]

snip

snip

So you're arguing that that was stated in dialog isn't a plot hole because of something that was never stated in dialog... Seems legit.
You know James also said Cerberus was working with the Collectors during the events of Mass Effect 2. So I wouldn't cut James any slack

Except it states in game that it has been half a year since ME2 and it states in game that James Vega was guarding you as well as in a comic that was released. So that is how James knew Shepard before the start of ME3 that isn't a plot hole it is about as explicitly stated as possible without breaking the show don't tell rule.

I'm not sure if what James said about Cerberus was a plot hole but that did piss me off.
ME1 Cerberus is bad
ME2 Actually no Cerberus is really cool and good and are just misunderstood
ME3 Scratch that Cerberus is bad again

Make up your damn minds Bioware

But I still have a problem with the Anderson thing. see in about 50% of games (Probably more) Anderson left the Alliance and there never was a "Councilor Udina"
I was under the impression that the Mass Effect games were supposed to adapt to the choices you made and not just retcon them to suit their lazy dipshit writers. So I'm going to continue to count that as a plot hole right along with if you picked Udina at the end of ME 1 (And killed the council) there are still aliens in the council even though Udina says very pointedly "Forge a new council composed of a single voice, humanity." So I'm pretty content to write Mass Effect 3 off as a plot hole ridden non-cannon mess

Except in ME3 Anderson says that he resigned as Councilor and let Udina have the job because, as shown in ME2, he hated being a Councilor. Also I'm pretty sure that the original plan was to make a new council where Humans were the leaders of the council and the other councilors were just puppets that would do what humans say. Of course its been 3 years since ME1 so you can assume that humanity has lost a lot of political clot seeing as the prevalent anti-human sentiment in ME2.

 

[sXeth]

The Duke does regain his senses just before the fact, though. He wasn't in his right mind at the start, but what bothered me was the way he actually came to after you popped out from hiding. Dazed and disoriented, yes, but he was well aware you were there and who you were. Also, I'm having a hard time understanding what this "Jesus-expy" is. x_x

Jesus-expy : Prophesied messiah arrived to save the world from X (in this case, Dragon).

More or less, when he first hurls you into the dungeons for eternity without a trial, its a very private matter. Once you get back out, he'd have to move against you much more publicly and probably arouse the ire of his already fairly fractured people. Even then, he does seem to be exiling you with the expedition plan before the Greatwall gets attacked, and even that mission could be considered a suicide run (or he realizes then that you are desperately needed as the biggest defense against the Dragon just got dropped like nothing).

 

[Exius Xavarus]

The Duke does regain his senses just before the fact, though. He wasn't in his right mind at the start, but what bothered me was the way he actually came to after you popped out from hiding. Dazed and disoriented, yes, but he was well aware you were there and who you were. Also, I'm having a hard time understanding what this "Jesus-expy" is. x_x

Jesus-expy : Prophesied messiah arrived to save the world from X (in this case, Dragon).

More or less, when he first hurls you into the dungeons for eternity without a trial, its a very private matter. Once you get back out, he'd have to move against you much more publicly and probably arouse the ire of his already fairly fractured people. Even then, he does seem to be exiling you with the expedition plan before the Greatwall gets attacked, and even that mission could be considered a suicide run (or he realizes then that you are desperately needed as the biggest defense against the Dragon just got dropped like nothing).

That would make more sense to me if the exact same thing didn't happen even if you ignored Aelinore or let the Duke continue on. =p

 

[Mikeyfell]

Except it states in game that it has been half a year since ME2 and it states in game that James Vega was guarding you as well as in a comic that was released. So that is how James knew Shepard before the start of ME3 that isn't a plot hole it is about as explicitly stated as possible without breaking the show don't tell rule.

Are you farmiliar with the "Hierarchy of Cannon"?
Everything that is relevant to the top tier (The source material, the games in Mass Effect's case) Have to hold up under the scrutiny of that tier alone. Any extended universe material can draw from (Or rely entirely on) the audience's understanding of higher tiers but not the other way around. So if Bioware decided to incorporate lower tier extended universe into top tier cannon they have to make sure that people who have only experienced the source material can pick up what's going on. (And if that means an exposition dump, then it shall be so.)

I'm not sure if what James said about Cerberus was a plot hole but that did piss me off.
ME1 Cerberus is bad
ME2 Actually no Cerberus is really cool and good and are just misunderstood
ME3 Scratch that Cerberus is bad again

Make up your damn minds Bioware

That's kind of taking presentation as fact.

ME1 The Alliance says Cerberus is bad, You have no reason to think otherwise
ME2 Cerberus says Cerberus isn't as bad as the Alliance says they are, You get to make up your own mind.
ME3 Bioware says Cerberus is bad and that they've always been bad and fuck Mass Effect 2

Facts are more like
ME1 The Alliance tells you to shoot up Cerberus facilities, then grounds your ship even though you're trying to save the universe.
ME2 Cerberus brings you back to life, gives you a ship and a crew and helps you save humans that the Alliance won't lift a finger to protect. They're not giving you much of a choice and they have ulterior motives but they're not hiding it from you.
ME3 They're attacking you, killing and experimenting on human refugees, orchestrating a government coup, and generally trying to stop you from saving the universe. And according to James they were helping the Collectors abduct the humans they brought Shepard back to stop.

You see how the first two are morally grey.
and see how the third one is completely morally black and stupid too.
The one thing that Cerberus, the Alliance and Shepard agree on is that Cerberus is out to help humanity.
So Killing and experimenting on humans, Stopping Shepard from saving Earth, and helping the Collectors abduct humans are all against The Illusive Man's MO.
(And if you want to use the "TIM is indoctrinated defense" He wasn't indoctrinated during Mass Effect 2 when he was supposed to be helping the Collectors abduct humans.)

So they might have been bad guys the whole time, but all the stuff they do in ME3 is directly against everything, The only thing they stand for.

Except in ME3 Anderson says that he resigned as Councilor and let Udina have the job because, as shown in ME2, he hated being a Councilor. Also I'm pretty sure that the original plan was to make a new council where Humans were the leaders of the council and the other councilors were just puppets that would do what humans say. Of course its been 3 years since ME1 so you can assume that humanity has lost a lot of political clot seeing as the prevalent anti-human sentiment in ME2.

In the same ME2 scene when he said he hated being a councilor he also said that... oh just listen

http://youtu.be/DbNNlOiPbPk?t=5m24s

"As much as I complain I have an important job to do here."

That doesn't sound like something somebody who's willing to throw in the towel on humanity would say.

My biggest complaint is that the total script for ME 3 was about one fifth the length it should have been.
If I (For example) Picked Anderson, Killed the Council, Gave Cerberus the Collector base and Rewrote the Heretics.
My playthrough of Mass Effect 3 should have nothing in common with a game that picked Udina, saved the Council and destroyed the Heretics and the Collector base.
The way it stands now Mass Effect 3 is a hastily thrown together cash in to capitalize on all the emotional investment that was devoted to the first two games.

The stuff they did throw together wasn't even good- retconns and plot holes aside.

 

[Aarowbeatsdragon]

Assassin's Creed 3

Why doesn't Desmond just go through Haytham's memories? Instead of spending 15 hours of going "WHERE IS CHARLES LEE" and not learning anything, you could have gained all the information needed by just going through Haytham's memories. Not to mention direct access to Templar secrets and what not.

They actually explain this, Its something to do with the animus, when a person conceives their child their memory's can no longer be lived, only their child's memory can be lived up until they have a child, like in AC2 when Desmond bleeding effect causes him to relive Altair's memory but when he conceives his child the camera stays with maria instead of following Altair. So not actually a plot hole but i can understand how it can be seen as one.

 

[sXeth]

The Duke does regain his senses just before the fact, though. He wasn't in his right mind at the start, but what bothered me was the way he actually came to after you popped out from hiding. Dazed and disoriented, yes, but he was well aware you were there and who you were. Also, I'm having a hard time understanding what this "Jesus-expy" is. x_x

Jesus-expy : Prophesied messiah arrived to save the world from X (in this case, Dragon).

More or less, when he first hurls you into the dungeons for eternity without a trial, its a very private matter. Once you get back out, he'd have to move against you much more publicly and probably arouse the ire of his already fairly fractured people. Even then, he does seem to be exiling you with the expedition plan before the Greatwall gets attacked, and even that mission could be considered a suicide run (or he realizes then that you are desperately needed as the biggest defense against the Dragon just got dropped like nothing).

That would make more sense to me if the exact same thing didn't happen even if you ignored Aelinore or let the Duke continue on. =p

Well yeah, that's part of the "Options kill a cohesive story" issue in gaming. It pretty much bludgeons you over the head to go talk to Aelinore, and the maid is always hanging in the lobby you have to walk through with the quest marker blinking. So they obviously had that intent but chose to leave it optional and somewhat break the narrative. (Although I still ended up with Madeleine even in the playthrough I did the Aelinore stuff).

 

[Blade1130]

Assassin's Creed 3

Why doesn't Desmond just go through Haytham's memories? Instead of spending 15 hours of going "WHERE IS CHARLES LEE" and not learning anything, you could have gained all the information needed by just going through Haytham's memories. Not to mention direct access to Templar secrets and what not.

They actually explain this, Its something to do with the animus, when a person conceives their child their memory's can no longer be lived, only their child's memory can be lived up until they have a child, like in AC2 when Desmond bleeding effect causes him to relive Altair's memory but when he conceives his child the camera stays with maria instead of following Altair. So not actually a plot hole but i can understand how it can be seen as one.

Where do they say that? Thinking back I have no memory of that ever being said. Although I guess that makes sense if memories are being held in genetics, then once the child is conceived his father's memories would be cut off at that point. I'm just curious as to where they pointed that out.

Regardless, Desmond can look at Haytham's memories and find out where Charles Lee is, but Connor can't. Keep in mind, Desmond is just observing this, he can't actually control Connor (in the context of the story at least, gameplay takes some liberties with that). Connor can't relive his father's memories like Desmond can, and so he can't find Charles Lee that way.

As for everyone arguing about the Didact, his motivation was flimsy at best and only really works if you just consider him as a racist. The game however doesn't really explain him at all. If you look it up on Wikipedia or read the books he makes sense, but the game doesn't make that clear at all. I don't think they ever explain what the Mantel of Responsibility is within the game itself. He does have his reasons for doing everything he does, the game just doesn't make them clear. Which is still bad story telling and doesn't exempt the game from anything, I just thought that was worth mentioning.

One thing that no one mentioned that really bothered me with Halo 4 though:

Spoiler: Minor Spoilers

What the Librarian does to the Chief so that he can beat the Didact is almost pointless. Yeah, I get that she made him immune to the Composer, but the whole "You can't beat him unless I screw with your DNA" was just ridiculous. Especially considering the final fight anyways. As Yahtzee put it, he downloads "Only one who can stop him.dll" and then it is never brought up again.

Also, (perhaps I'm misunderstanding this) didn't the Librarian say that she was somehow behind the Chief's creation? That she "planted the seeds" for his genetic code and indirectly led to the creation of his armor and augmentations? That just doesn't make any sense to me. And I thought the whole "I'm speaking to this guy knowing that his descendent in 500 years will relive his memories and hear this conversation and save the world because of it" of Assassin's Creed 2 was ridiculous foresight. And from my understanding the Librarian can't see into the future like Minerva could!

Edit: My 117th post! Ironic considering the subject.

 

[bug_of_war]

Just to clarify...
The advantages I listed (eg. the massive tactical advantage the reapers lost) actually has nothing to do with how aware people were of the truth behind the rachni or the reapers, or considering them a threat;

2000 year delay allowing everyone to advance
reverse engineered sovereign weapons (thianx cannons)
control of relays
control of citadel
no surprise attack via centre of relay network (even though they still somehow managed to make ME3 a kind of surprise attack anyway)
3 new powerful races to contend with -humans, krogan, possibly geth
The Quarians also have the biggest baddass fleet which they only made about 1800 years after the rachni war,('cos that's when the geth chased them off their planet)

It seems the galaxy has almost tripled in strength, and the reapers have lost their surprise citadel relay attack (the one the prothean VI on Ilos highlighted and said was their undoing)

The reapers wanted to attack 2000 years ago (or maybe much earlier) because it was a good balance between the civilisations being advanced enough to be worth culling and not too difficult to fight even with their surprise citadel tactic.
They have lost so many advantages in so many area's even if 99.9999% of the galaxy weren't preparing. The only point in my list that involves preparing is the mass production of thianx cannons.

This is where we can interpret in different ways. I think we are 2x/3x more powerful (+ citadel tactic stopped- the prothean legacy that makes us the first cycle that has a chance is a cool thought) means we had a chance to fight the reapers (if shepard unites the galaxy) Other's think the crucible is still necessary

I think in the codex it tells you the translator is built into omnitool type devices. When a new species is found they are integrated into the translation devices. They go into in mass effect 1 when they talk about the extranet and the hanar speak by some sort of illuminious lights that the translator changes into audio dialogue but you see them flash anyway .

Okay, I see what you're saying. I guess in the end Bioware kind of shot themselves in the foot when it came to even just starting the first game seeing as how the backstory seems to counteract most things that happened in all 3 games (The first being the least effected obviously). I still like the series though, even with the original endings, 'plot holes' etc.

 

[IronMit]

Okay, I see what you're saying. I guess in the end Bioware kind of shot themselves in the foot when it came to even just starting the first game seeing as how the backstory seems to counteract most things that happened in all 3 games (The first being the least effected obviously). I still like the series though, even with the original endings, 'plot holes' etc.

It was billed as a planned trilogy but it either wasn't or it was changed.
The first one was 'least effected' because the backstory doesn't counteract anything


Everything raps up nicely in ME1. The prothean history& the reaper rumours. The little clues in the history and revelations of the rachni wars, rachni queen, the conduit, sovereign was using the rachni but failed then used saren and the geth when the prothean beacon was found. When the VI at Ilos explains everything to you, you think back to all the clues (lore, history, mini-revelations) and it all fits together. Play it a second time and you see all the clues and things you missed. ME1 is really good.

In ME2 they decided to tell you more about what the reaper's were - They made up the collectors and used cerberus to achieve this goal. It was kind of a giant filler to set up ME3. The arrival dlc was more relevant then the main campaign.
However there was all this forshadowing of dark energy also - Tali's recruitment mission. The sun on her planet is ageing prematurely at the edge of the galaxy. Apparently dark energy will destroy the galaxy and the reapers infuse advanced civilisations in the hope of solving this crisis. Humanity being their best chance this cycle. Hence why the collectors were collecting humans in a risky way, because making the human reaper was the highest priority.

The ex lead writer (ME1, ME2)said this was the original reason for the reapers...but then said 'it was one of many idea's on the table'. Pretty random..I mean making up the collectors and illusive man in ME2 is a means to an end but making up the primary motive and reason for everything on the 3rd act is bound to cause problems...and it did lol


So basically the order chaos theory used at the end of ME3 was pretty contrived.. considering the word chaos was used once by sovereign in ME1 and in a different context and i don't think it was ever mentioned again until ME3. There were 2 or 3 cut and paste forshadowing of this order-chaos theory in ME3. remember when the reaper on rannoch started talking...was pretty out of place...it looked like they added it pretty late into development.

Sorry I keep replying when you think the convo is done lol. I was really confused when ME3 finished and was trying to make it make sense to me and when it didn't... I tried to take into account every single possibility to figure out what happened and thought I would share. This is my interpretation based on the information I talked about above.

Basically when ME3 was going to be made...they wanted to market it to new players...hence a one game story arc to rap it up was taken(this is why all those crucial stuff from ME1 and the lore was never mentioned- would confused new players). They thought a 'take back earth' situation would be most appealing. Everything was twisted to reach this goal..earth is the centre of attention throughout, the citadel randomly ended up over earth etc etc.