2146 réponses à ce sujet

[smudboy]

Alessar wrote...

Indeed, well thanks for the responses they were all well written and illustrated the points well. But yeah I agree with progression of how ME should go. I'll end up keeping the base this go round.

You mean there's a rational, open mind on these forums?

I'm going to go see if my flux capacitor is still working...

[DarkSeraphym]

scotchtape622 wrote...

Well, there were pictures of Reapers on the datapad Shepard had, and IMO it didn't look like Soverign.

Once again, this is an assumption based on an in-game prop. The Illusive Man assumes there is technology within that Base when he asks Shepard to keep it and every party member you have that survives foreshadows the samething when they say things like "I don't agree with giving them the base, I hope whatever they find there is worth it." or "That was a risky decision Shepard, hope you know what you are doing." The game actually acknowledges this assumption itself.

However, the datapad in the game is little more than a datapad prop handed to Shepard. We can't read what is on it and the only thing we can see from it is a picture of Harbinger. Likewise, this is never even mentioned after the game is over in the same manner that keeping the Collector Base is. EDI never says anything like "Good thing I datamined that base before I left" or "Shepard! I have interesting data that I collected from that Reaper Base! Come here and have a look." As far as I can tell, the datapad is little more than something we observe as players.

[scotchtape622]

I don't see how that makes sense... So what is Shepard seeing? And why would that even happen.



The most logical conclusion is that Shepard got intel on the Reapers somehow. Where did they get it from? To me, it seems most likely that it came from the CB.

[jbblue05]

DarkSeraphym wrote...

scotchtape622 wrote...

Well, there were pictures of Reapers on the datapad Shepard had, and IMO it didn't look like Soverign.

Once again, this is an assumption based on an in-game prop. The Illusive Man assumes there is technology within that Base when he asks Shepard to keep it and every party member you have that survives foreshadows the samething when they say things like "I don't agree with giving them the base, I hope whatever they find there is worth it." or "That was a risky decision Shepard, hope you know what you are doing." The game actually acknowledges this assumption itself.

However, the datapad in the game is little more than a datapad prop handed to Shepard. We can't read what is on it and the only thing we can see from it is a picture of Harbinger. Likewise, this is never even mentioned after the game is over in the same manner that keeping the Collector Base is. EDI never says anything like "Good thing I datamined that base before I left" or "Shepard! I have interesting data that I collected from that Reaper Base! Come here and have a look." As far as I can tell, the datapad is little more than something we observe as players.

I'm curious if EDI did find anything.
On the Collector ship Shepard has to link EDI with the Ship.
Their is no evidence suggesting EDI mined the Collector Base for information 

[DPSSOC]

scotchtape622 wrote...

Did EDI not gain access to the Collector Base's computer? How do you think Shepard got the intel on the coming of the Reapers in the ending cinematic? It seems clear to me that EDI mined the CB's servers for data.

Yes EDI got some data.  The question remains of how much.  If all she got was 10% then the destruction of the Collector Base is a sizeable loss.

[scotchtape622]

DPSSOC wrote...

scotchtape622 wrote...

Did EDI not gain access to the Collector Base's computer? How do you think Shepard got the intel on the coming of the Reapers in the ending cinematic? It seems clear to me that EDI mined the CB's servers for data.

Yes EDI got some data.  The question remains of how much.  If all she got was 10% then the destruction of the Collector Base is a sizeable loss.

Idunno, maybe we got 100%. It wasn't explained well in the game.

[DarkSeraphym]

scotchtape622 wrote...

I don't see how that makes sense... So what is Shepard seeing? And why would that even happen.

The most logical conclusion is that Shepard got intel on the Reapers somehow. Where did they get it from? To me, it seems most likely that it came from the CB.

It's a visual artform? Oftentimes visual arts will put in an object that is meant to symbolize some overall premise or feeling, which is especially true when the artform lacks the capacity to explain itself. Objects within visual arts do not always have to have an explicit meaning within the scheme of the work itself, they can have implicit meanings that symbolize something broader. The scene certainly takes place where there is no dialogue so there is no way the game can really explain the nature of that datapad. Perhaps that datapad is meant to symbolize the notion that Shepard now fully grasps the nature of this threat.

I'm just kind of throwing ideas out. I have no idea what the datapad means or what it's in-game context is. What I do know is that it shows up for literally around 3 to 4 seconds and then disappears from the game, never seen again and never mentioned again. This is very much unlike what happens when you keep the Collector Base, in which the Illusive Man explicitly mentions the possibility that there is stuff on the base that could be useful and then after all is said and done, all of your team mates will condemn you for the decision to hand it over to him knowing that.

I just think that it is a mistake to compare something that is explicitly mentioned in the game with story writing mechanics like foreshadowing to something that appears in the background and then vanishes without a trace.

Modifié par DarkSeraphym, 07 octobre 2010 - 01:51 .

[DPSSOC]

scotchtape622 wrote...

DPSSOC wrote...

scotchtape622 wrote...

Did EDI not gain access to the Collector Base's computer? How do you think Shepard got the intel on the coming of the Reapers in the ending cinematic? It seems clear to me that EDI mined the CB's servers for data.

Yes EDI got some data.  The question remains of how much.  If all she got was 10% then the destruction of the Collector Base is a sizeable loss.

Idunno, maybe we got 100%. It wasn't explained well in the game.

Precisely.  Since we have no actual figure to work with it's really up to how optimistic you're willing to be.  In my case not at all so, rather than blowing it up, I advocate tearing it apart piece by piece until we're sure there's nothing of any value left.

[scotchtape622]

DarkSeraphym wrote...

scotchtape622 wrote...

I don't see how that makes sense... So what is Shepard seeing? And why would that even happen.

The most logical conclusion is that Shepard got intel on the Reapers somehow. Where did they get it from? To me, it seems most likely that it came from the CB.

It's a visual artform? Oftentimes visual arts will put in an object that is meant to symbolize some overall premise or feeling, which is especially true when the artform lacks the capacity to explain itself. Objects within visual arts do not always have to have an explicit meaning within the scheme of the work itself, they can have implicit meanings that symbolize something broader. The scene certainly takes place where there is no dialogue so there is no way the game can really explain the nature of that datapad. Perhaps that datapad is meant to symbolize the notion that Shepard now fully grasps the nature of this threat.

I'm just kind of throwing ideas out. I have no idea what the datapad means or what it's in-game context is. What I do know is that it shows up for literally around 3 to 4 seconds and then disappears from the game, never seen again and never mentioned again. This is very much unlike what happens when you keep the Collector Base, in which the Illusive Man explicitly mentions the possibility that there is stuff on the base that could be useful and then after all is said and done, all of your team mates will condemn you for the decision to hand it over to him knowing that.

I really don't understand what you are trying to say here. Harbinger is in the picture, and yet we haven't met Harbinger, and there is no evidence he has even entered the Galaxy since the Reapers destroyed the Protheans.

How is a picture of him symbolic? If they wanted to show that Shepard grasps the nature of the threat, the could give him an epic line like they did at the end of ME1.

EDIT:
I know what you are saying, DPSSOC, I was just pointing out that the people that destroyed the base are probably not at a complete loss.

Modifié par scotchtape622, 07 octobre 2010 - 01:53 .

[Arijharn]

I have a question to those who destroyed the base, if in ME3 we got the potential to get another piece of hardware to pre-empt the Reapers (but not necessarily Reaper tech) and it was also in an area that made it politically impossible for the Council races to act so that only Cerberus could get it, would you? Would you also get it (or not get it) if you knew for sure that it was the last technological upgrade you can get?

[scotchtape622]

Wait, so basically in the same situation that I was in for the Collector Base?



Probably not, obviously it depends on the exact situation and the tech that Cerberus would be getting. If it isn't Reaper tech, I'd be more likely to because they couldn't try and build a Reaper with it.

[jbblue05]

scotchtape622 wrote...

Wait, so basically in the same situation that I was in for the Collector Base?

Probably not, obviously it depends on the exact situation and the tech that Cerberus would be getting. If it isn't Reaper tech, I'd be more likely to because they couldn't try and build a Reaper with it.

But everything is Reaper tech

[DarkSeraphym]

scotchtape622 wrote...

I really don't understand what you are trying to say here. Harbinger is in the picture, and yet we haven't met Harbinger, and there is no evidence he has even entered the Galaxy since the Reapers destroyed the Protheans.

How is a picture of him symbolic? If they wanted to show that Shepard grasps the nature of the threat, the could give him an epic line like they did at the end of ME1.

EDIT:
I know what you are saying, DPSSOC, I was just pointing out that the people that destroyed the base are probably not at a complete loss.

Allright, allow me to clarify.

The scene in question is a scene in which a datapad appears that shows a picture of a Reaper that looks like Harbinger. Shepard looks down at the prop, then looks out to the stars and we get a scene showing a massive portion of the Reapers (I only say massive because I can't really conclude if that is all of them. That might have been all that would fit on the frame). The prop in question is never explained, has no real in-game context because it's never even mentioned again, and disappears almost as quickly as it shows up shortly before we see a determined Shepard looking out to the stars, followed by a look at the threat we are facing as players (Shepard obviously didn't pull out a telescope and go looking to see that scene himself). To me, that datapad is the link between Shepard's understanding of the threat ahead of him and the understanding we gain from the huge number of them we see as players.

Since it is never explained within the context of that scene, as there is no dialogue in the scene whatsoever; I believe that the scene in question has more of a symbolic nature than it does an explicit one. BioWare chose not to include dialogue in the scene, which leads me to have to turn to an art interpretation route for the same reason that I do so when I look at certain scenes in movies, photographs, sculptures, and paintings; they lack the capacity to explain themselves. I could very easily turn to an approach of explicit interpretation within the context of the game, which is not inherently wrong. However, I think it is wrong to approach it as the only logical explanation when the game never explains what it is we are looking at and the datapad in question is never mentioned after the ending cinematic ends and the game continues the sameway that other things are mentioned by some of the Mass Effect characters.

If I need to clarify anything else, please do ask. I think that is as clear as I can make what I am trying to say, but I might be able to smooth out some of the edges so to speak.

Modifié par DarkSeraphym, 07 octobre 2010 - 02:05 .

[scotchtape622]

jbblue05 wrote...

scotchtape622 wrote...

Wait, so basically in the same situation that I was in for the Collector Base?

Probably not, obviously it depends on the exact situation and the tech that Cerberus would be getting. If it isn't Reaper tech, I'd be more likely to because they couldn't try and build a Reaper with it.

But everything is Reaper tech

Well, let's say that Cerberus figures out how to repair that ancient Mass Accelerator weapon. I'd let them have it because we know it can kill Reapers and I don't see it as a major threat because even though it is very powerful, they'd be stupid to try and use it against the Council Races, especially since I know the location of the Accelerator.

EDIT: I don't see your logic here, Seraphim.

If they were attempting "art" then they wouldn't put a picture of a Reaper. They would put something the could symbolize the Reaper threat.

And in books/films, it is same to assume that you can take everything at face value (ie he saw a picture of a Reaper) and a symbolic level (Shepard knows whats coming, and is going to need to prepare or whatever).

Modifié par scotchtape622, 07 octobre 2010 - 02:06 .

[Arijharn]

The thing about that giant mass accelerator cannon, as I see it, is that it isn't really anything all that new. The principles behind it are exactly the same as the mass accelerator weaponry behind what the SR-1 fired, to what a Dreadnought fires to what your handgun fires, it's all the same thing.



The problem with it is that it'd require us to mass produce them, which would simply take longer compared to outfitting our weapons with the latest and greatest Thanix weapons systems (providing they'd even work, but since it generates 'irresistible heat' as well, and that's supposedly something that conventional shield technology doesn't protect, who knows how effective it'd be?) and it's not as if Thanix weapon systems can be deployed on dreadnoughts anyway (for some reason).



My point being though, if you make decisions that effectively squander your current chance, eventually you'll just run out of chances. Destroying them essentially just to spite TIM and Cerberus is, I feel, frankly giving TIM/Cerberus too much credit.

[scotchtape622]

I didn't destroy the base to spite TIM and Cerberus. My emotional connection to Cerberus wasn't a major factor in my decision.



PS, The MAC was a super weapon that could fire across the galaxy and destroy a Reaper in one shot, we have nothing like that.

[DarkSeraphym]

scotchtape622 wrote...

Wait, so basically in the same situation that I was in for the Collector Base?

Probably not, obviously it depends on the exact situation and the tech that Cerberus would be getting. If it isn't Reaper tech, I'd be more likely to because they couldn't try and build a Reaper with it.

But everything is Reaper tech. Well, let's say that Cerberus figures out how to repair that ancient Mass Accelerator weapon. I'd let them have it because we know it can kill Reapers and I don't see it as a major threat because even though it is very powerful, they'd be stupid to try and use it against the Council Races, especially since I know the location of the Accelerator.

EDIT: I don't see your logic here, Seraphim.

If they were attempting "art" then they wouldn't put a picture of a Reaper. They would put something the could symbolize the Reaper threat.

And in books/films, it is same to assume that you can take everything at face value (ie he saw a picture of a [Reaper) and a symbolic level (Shepard knows whats coming, and is going to need to prepare or whatever).

Books and movies aren't the best comparison because books and movies are not forced to engage in the immersive factor that this particular video game is. I've never seen movie or read a book that let me start off by naming by own character, creating a background, and then going about the game as I kind of see fit with respect to that character.

As for something symbolizing the Reaper threat, we do get that scene; that is the scene in which we, the players, see a fraction of that Reaper Armada in dark space. However, there are two entities here at once, Shepard and the players and both of them have a connection that is unattainable in any movie or book I have ever read before. How do you intend the developers to show us what Shepard is thinking or feeling at that moment with respect to the Reapers short of showing a picture of one and his reaction to it? There aren't any for thousands of light-years anymore, not after what you did to the Human-Reaper anyways.

Modifié par DarkSeraphym, 07 octobre 2010 - 02:22 .

[Arijharn]

But the standout thing about the super railgun was that it was 'super', not that it was principles we didn't understand. There simply isn't the militaristic or political will to make our own weapons of that size, considering mass accelerator weaponry from dreadnoughts themselves are already considered WMD's.

[scotchtape622]

At the end of ME1, they show how he is thinking by letting him say something at the end. If this was their intent (to show what he is thinking) they would have just done that again. It would have been much more logical and fit with how the ME series has gone so far.

EDIT:

Maybe we have the basic ideas, but the Acension couldn't even damage Soverign, while that ancient gun killed a Reaper. Those two aren't even close.

IMO I'd rather have the gun than the Collector Base.

Modifié par scotchtape622, 07 octobre 2010 - 02:22 .

[Arijharn]

Did the Ascension even fire at Sovereign? Or were they too busy going: "Mommmy! I have the Council onboard, don't hurt meee!"



I guess shield technology is only rated to prevent certain speeds and/or 'weights,' like it can protect against 'conventional' weapons but a planet-cracking railgun might be beyond it's capabilities.

[DarkSeraphym]

scotchtape622 wrote...

At the end of ME1, they show how he is thinking by letting him say something at the end. If this was their intent (to show what he is thinking) they would have just done that again. It would have been much more logical and fit with how the ME series has gone so far.

Not necessarily, the ending scene you are referring to contains dialogue from other characters as well. This scene in particular is more similar to the scene in which we think Shepard was killed but find out he wasn't when Shepard shows up with that damn smirk on his face. Like that scene, this scene has absolutely no dialogue of any kind either because it really doesn't need it; it's designed to give us a sense of what is going on without really needing dialogue.

All that I am saying is that there are other ways to interpret that datapad than to assume EDI datamined the base and pulled that datapad from it, thus ending up with similar relevant data anyways. We see a picture of a Reaper on it with no legible text, to us anyways, and the datapad just disappears as quickly as it pops in. It's never seen or mentioned again. If you had blown up the base and got this kind of data anyways, I think someone would have mentioned it at some point the same way that the characters acknowledge my decision to keep the base. No one does so, or at least not that I have seen. I find it a little hard to put a whole lot of faith in an object that comes and goes without warning and is never acknowledged again.

Modifié par DarkSeraphym, 07 octobre 2010 - 02:31 .

[scotchtape622]

Well, EDI said that Reapers shields were practically impervious to Dreadnought fire.

EDIT:

Seraphym, that doesn't change the simple fact that the was a picture of a Reaper, in the game, and Shepard was looking at it.

A smile has room for interpretation. A datapad with clear photographs does not.

Modifié par scotchtape622, 07 octobre 2010 - 02:32 .

[Mr. Gogeta34]

scotchtape622 wrote...

Teltan was tasked to create new methods in increasing biotic powers. They followed protocol for Jack, making sure that none of the experiments would kill her, but she still ended up the way she is.

Can you honestly try and justify the imprisonment of a twelve year old girl with autism? An imprisonment where she will be tortured and given drugs that she does not want to take?

They did not follow protocol with Jack... she was a mistake.  Nothing suggests otherwise.

I've only read the summary so you'd have to shed  more light on what happened there.  But from what I can tell, that 12 year old girl had amazing biotic potential.  That being maximized through drugs or whatever isn't a prison per-se...  If you're a fan of Halo, think about the Spartan II program.  Kids were taken at a young age and subjected to all kinds of things.  Not quiiiiiite imprisonment.

[jbblue05]

scotchtape622 wrote...

jbblue05 wrote...

scotchtape622 wrote...

Wait, so basically in the same situation that I was in for the Collector Base?

Probably not, obviously it depends on the exact situation and the tech that Cerberus would be getting. If it isn't Reaper tech, I'd be more likely to because they couldn't try and build a Reaper with it.

But everything is Reaper tech

Well, let's say that Cerberus figures out how to repair that ancient Mass Accelerator weapon. I'd let them have it because we know it can kill Reapers and I don't see it as a major threat because even though it is very powerful, they'd be stupid to try and use it against the Council Races, especially since I know the location of the Accelerator.

EDIT: I don't see your logic here, Seraphim.

If they were attempting "art" then they wouldn't put a picture of a Reaper. They would put something the could symbolize the Reaper threat.

And in books/films, it is same to assume that you can take everything at face value (ie he saw a picture of a Reaper) and a symbolic level (Shepard knows whats coming, and is going to need to prepare or whatever).

How do you know the exact location of the accelerator weapon..
The weapon is highly dangerous did you see what it did to Klendagon
If you have no  problem with the weapon then you shouldn' have a problem keeping the base because it could help defeat the Reapers

[scotchtape622]

Mr. Gogeta34 wrote...

scotchtape622 wrote...

Teltan was tasked to create new methods in increasing biotic powers. They followed protocol for Jack, making sure that none of the experiments would kill her, but she still ended up the way she is.

Can you honestly try and justify the imprisonment of a twelve year old girl with autism? An imprisonment where she will be tortured and given drugs that she does not want to take?

They did not follow protocol with Jack... she was a mistake.  Nothing suggests otherwise.

I've only read the summary so you'd have to shed  more light on what happened there.  But from what I can tell, that 12 year old girl had amazing biotic potential.  That being maximized through drugs or whatever isn't a prison per-se...  If you're a fan of Halo, think about the Spartan II program.  Kids were taken at a young age and subjected to all kinds of things.  Not quiiiiiite imprisonment.

It is imprisonment. They were stolen from their homes and many of them were killed by the attempts to improve them.

EDIT:

jblue, it is different because I suspect TIM in planning on building a Reaper, which is a much greater threat IMO, and it is also mobile.

EDIT2:

Read the scenario, in that case, I would know where it was.

Modifié par scotchtape622, 07 octobre 2010 - 02:34 .